Martin v. Carey
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]*81rectly 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.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
89 F. App'x 80 (Martin v. Carey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.