Plascencia

Plascencia v. Alameida

Good Law
467 F.3d 1190·2006 WL 3110570
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 2, 200605-56458California5,905 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trott, J.

Petitioner Mara Plaseencia appeals the district court’s denial of her petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Plaseencia was convicted by a jury in state court of the murder of Teresa Silva and sentenced to a prison term of fifty years to life. Plascen-cia claims the trial court (1) violated her Sixth Amendment right to confront adverse witnesses when it restricted cross-examination of three witnesses, (2) erred in admitting impermissible evidence, and (3) imposed an unconstitutional sentence enhancement. In addition to these claims, Plaseencia avers her trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate the criminal background of two jailhouse informants and for failing to object to the admission of certain evidence. We disagree and affirm the district court’s denial of Plascencia’s habeas petition.

I

In July 1998, the victim Teresa Silva and the father of her children, Manuel Galda-mez, became involved in a dispute with a person whose car was blocking the couple’s garage. The person was related to Plas-cencia. Later that day, Plaseencia and her cousin, “Yeni” Haro, went to Silva and Galdamez’s apartment, angry that their relative had been “disrespected.” Yeni,…

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.