Alberto Rodriguez Martinez v. James H. Gomez, Director Attorney General of California

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Alberto Rodriguez MARTINEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James H. GOMEZ, Director; Attorney General of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 92-56611. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 21, 1993. * Decided June 28, 1993. Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 California state prisoner Alberto Rodriguez Martinez appeals pro se from the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his conviction for two counts of assault on a police officer. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and affirm. 3 The denial of a writ of habeas corpus is reviewed de novo. Tinsley v. Borg, 895 F.2d 520, 523 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 111 S.Ct. 974 (1991). State court factual conclusions are entitled to a presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). 4 Martinez contends that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the…