Escobar v. Cambra
This text of 151 F. App'x 539 (Escobar v. Cambra) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Jesus M. Esco-bar appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his conviction for first degree murder and personal firearm use. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Escobar contends that his appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to include certain claims in Esco-bar’s discretionary appeal to the California Supreme Court. Because a defendant cannot be deprived of effective assistance of counsel where no constitutional right to counsel exists, we conclude that the California Supreme Court’s decision denying this claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); Wainwright v. Torna, 455 U.S. 586, 587-88, 102 S.Ct. 1300, 71 L.Ed.2d 475 (1982) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
151 F. App'x 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/escobar-v-cambra-ca9-2005.