Thomas v. Castro

69 F. App'x 399
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 10, 2003·No. No. 01-56797; D.C. No. CV-00-10989-LGB·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The district court did not err in dismissing the petitioner’s habeas corpus petition with prejudice. Appellate counsel’s decision not to raise on appeal the trial court’s denial of a continuance did not fall “below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Because the trial court has considerable discretion with respect to granting continuances, United States v. Tham, 960 F.2d 1391, 1396 (9th Cir.1991), and fully supported its ruling denying the continuance, appellate counsel reasonably could have [400] believed this argument would be unsuccessful.

AFFIRMED.

Footnotes

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

Thomas v. Castro, 69 F. App'x 399 (9th Cir. 2003).

69 F. App'x 399 (Thomas v. Castro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thomas v. Castro, Warden
540 U.S. 1010 (Supreme Court, 2003)