Andrew Milo Noble v. Roger W. Crist, and Arizona Department of Correction

996 F.2d 1226 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Andrew Milo NOBLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Roger W. CRIST, and Arizona Department of Correction, Respondents-Appellees. No. 92-16290. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 8, 1993. * Decided June 14, 1993. Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Andrew Milo Noble, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his conviction for child molestation and kidnapping. Noble contends that the district court erred by finding that he did not receive ineffective assistance of trial counsel. He claims that his trial counsel was ineffective because: 1) he failed to investigate and call witnesses and to present evidence at trial to support his alibi and misidentification defenses; and 2) he failed to file a motion for a competency examination pursuant to rule 11 of the Arizona Rules of…