James David Hix v. Eddie Ylst

967 F.2d 586 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James David HIX, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Eddie YLST, Respondent-Appellee. No. 90-16769. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 13, 1992. Decided July 6, 1992. Before TANG, PREGERSON and BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Petitioner James Hix was convicted in state court for the second degree murder of Rosalind Botelho. His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. Hix then filed a habeas petition alleging (1) that the trial court improperly refused to instruct the jury on his defenses of unconsciousness, voluntary intoxication, and mental disorder, (2) that the trial court gave unconstitutional jury instructions, and (3) that prosecutorial misconduct violated his constitutional rights. The district court denied his petition. We affirm. I. A. The Defense of Unconsciousness 3 Hix alleges that the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on his defense of unconsciousness…