United States v. Csaba Mesterhazy

15 F.3d 1093 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Csaba MESTERHAZY, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10002. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 13, 1993. * Decided Dec. 17, 1993. Before: LAY, ** HALL and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM *** FACTS 2 Csaba Mesterhazy was convicted of one count of conspiracy to defraud and aiding and abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Secs. 371 and 2. In this appeal he argues he was denied effective assistance of counsel and due process because his trial counsel failed to object, move for a mistrial, or ask the court for a curative instruction after the introduction of evidence which Mesterhazy claims was irrelevant and prejudicial. 3 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and we affirm. STANDARD OF REVIEW 4 Although we generally prefer that appellants raise ineffective assistance of counsel claims in habeas proceedings, we may decide the issue on…