X.L. Cook v. Robert Borg and the Attorney General of California

977 F.2d 588 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. X.L. COOK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert BORG; and the Attorney General of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 91-56034. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 21, 1992. * Decided Oct. 20, 1992. Before CHOY, SNEED and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 X.L. Cook, a state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. He contends that the state court improperly limited his cross-examination of the victim, and that the district court erred by denying an evidentiary hearing and by failing to review the state court record. We reject these contentions, and we affirm. 3 Cook was found guilty of committing lewd acts upon a minor under the age of 14 in violation of state law. He argues that the state trial court improperly restricted his cross-examination of the victim when it barred him from asking her whether she was…