Antonio Barajas Mora v. United States District Court, Eastern District of Washington

995 F.2d 232 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Antonio Barajas MORA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON, Respondent-Appellee. No. 91-36370. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 25, 1993. * Decided June 8, 1993. Before: HUG, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Antonio Barajas Mora appeals pro se the district court's sua sponte dismissal of his motion for habeas corpus relief as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (d). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . We review de novo a district court's decision on a section 2255 motion, United States v. Moore, 921 F.2d 207, 209 (9th Cir.1990), and we affirm on other grounds, see Kruso v. International Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 , 1421 (9th Cir.1989) (in reviewing decisions of the district court, the court of appeals may affirm on any ground finding support in the record), cert. denied, 496 U.S.…