Steven Joseph Sanchez v. Charles Marshall Dan Lungren, State of California Attorney General

12 F.3d 1108 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Steven Joseph SANCHEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Charles MARSHALL; Dan Lungren, State of California Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-15309. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 17, 1993. * Decided Dec. 1, 1993. MEMORANDUM ** Before: SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 Steven Sanchez, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas petition challenging his jury convictions for two counts of first degree murder and use of a firearm. Sanchez contends he was denied the right of confrontation under the Sixth Amendment and he received ineffective assistance from both trial and appellate counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 . We review de novo, Norris v. Risley, 878 F.2d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir.1989), and we affirm. Background 2 On August 9, 1989, Sanchez filed a habeas petition with the…