Jimmy Kirksey v. Renee Baker

Good Law
612 F. App'x 459
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 10, 201513-99009California804 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Jimmy Kirksey appeals from the district court’s dismissal as untimely and/or procedurally defaulted of several claims raised in his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, and denial on the merits of his remaining claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

I

The district court found that all but three of Kirksey’s claims were procedurally defaulted. Kirksey argues that the district court erred in concluding that Kirk-sey did not show adequate cause and prejudice to excuse the procedural default. See Murray v. Carrier, 477 U.S. 478, 488 , 106 S.Ct. 2639 , 91 L.Ed.2d 397 (1986).

Kirksey claims that his late discovery of evidence that the state trial court authored the supplemental competency report of Dr. Franklin Master is adequate cause to excuse Kirksey’s default of Claims 1, 2, 3(B), and 4. But the report was available to Kirksey’s trial counsel well before Kirksey pleaded guilty, affording counsel plenty of time to explore any doubts about its authorship while the original proceedings were ongoing. See Murray, 477 U.S. at 488 , 106 S.Ct. 2639 .

Kirksey argues that his original post-conviction counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.