Arthur Garcia v. Robert Glenn Borg Attorney General of the State of California and James Rowland

8 F.3d 26 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Arthur GARCIA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert Glenn BORG; Attorney General of the State of California; and James Rowland, Respondents-Appellees. No. 91-55408. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 5, 1993. * Decided Sept. 30, 1993. Before: BROWNING, POOLE, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 On the eve of his state murder trial, Appellant Arthur Garcia asked the trial judge for new counsel. Garcia was already on his second appointed counsel, and had already been granted a number of continuances. To grant Garcia's motion, the trial judge realized, would mean another continuance. 3 The judge denied Garcia's request. 4 In this habeas appeal, Garcia argues that the ruling denied him his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Garcia also argues that because of the judge's ruling, he was forced to accept a plea rather than risk trial with his disfavored counsel. For the reasons described…