Edmonton v. People of State of Cal.

979 F.2d 854 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Kenneth Ian EDMONTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; Robert Borg, Warden of Folsom State Prison; Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 92-15365. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 4, 1992. * Decided Nov. 16, 1992. Before SCHROEDER, FLETCHER and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Kenneth Edmonton, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the denial of his application for release on his own recognizance on bail pending his state court appeal. 1 We review de novo the district court's decision on a habeas petition. Desire v. Attorney General of California, No. 91-55334, slip op. 11233, 11237 (9th Cir. Sept. 16, 1992). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and we affirm. 3 The federal remedy of habeas corpus lies only if an individual is in custody in violation of the federal…