Ivan Von Staich v. Robert G. Borg

988 F.2d 122 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ivan Von STAICH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert G. BORG, Respondent-Appellee. No. 91-56517. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 8, 1993. * Decided March 3, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. SACV89-848-JSL, J. Spencer Letts, District Judge, Presiding. 1 C.D.Cal. 2 AFFIRMED. 3 Before CANBY, WILLIAM A. NORRIS, Circuit Judges, and TANNER ** , Senior District Judge. 4 MEMORANDUM *** 5 Ivan Von Staich, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. He contends that (1) the trial judge improperly admitted evidence, (2) his counsel was ineffective, (3) the jury instructions deprived him of due process, and (4) he is entitled to a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. We review the denial of the habeas corpus petition de novo, Thomas v. Brewer, 923 F.2d 1361,…