Riner

MEMORANDUM

Defendant Ronald Riner appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration, wherein he alleged the district court erred by finding his habeas claims unexhausted in the state court. This court granted a certificate of appealability as to the following issue: “whether the district court erred in dismissing as unexhausted Riner’s claim that counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate the effects of Elavil and allowing him to plead guilty under the influence of that drug; and if so, whether Riner received ineffective assistance for the above reasons.” We note that an earlier Ninth Circuit panel remanded this case back to the district court “for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court’s [] decision in Rhines v. Weber.” On remand, instead of arguing this issue, Riner filed a motion for reconsideration arguing that the district court erred in the first instance by ruling his state claims unexhausted; the district court denied that motion. Even if we were to assume that this case is properly before this panel now and even were we to assume that the district court erred in ruling Riner’s claims unexhausted, we nevertheless conclude that Riner did…