Martin v. Carey

89 F. App'x 80
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 25, 2004·No. No. 01-57127·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Jerry Martin seeks a writ of habeas corpus because the trial court refused to appoint an expert on eyewitness testimony. This issue was dealt with di[81] rectly in Jackson v. Ylst, 921 F.2d 882 (9th Cir.1990), in which we held, among other things, that a claim such as Martin’s is barred under Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288, 109 S.Ct. 1060, 103 L.Ed.2d 334 (1989). See Jackson, 921 F.2d at 885-86. Martin has failed to demonstrate that Jackson no longer controls. Therefore, the petition is denied.

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Martin v. Carey, 89 F. App'x 80 (9th Cir. 2004).

89 F. App'x 80 (Martin v. Carey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Martin v. Carey, Warden
542 U.S. 943 (Supreme Court, 2004)