Robert Duncan v. George Baldwin

17 F.3d 394 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Robert DUNCAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George BALDWIN Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-35476. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 17, 1993. * Decided Feb. 9, 1994. Before: CHOY, GOODWIN and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Robert A. Duncan, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 petition for habeas corpus following his conviction for first-degree rape and first-degree sodomy and rejection of his appeal by the Oregon Court of Appeals. Duncan contends that: (1) his trial counsel was ineffective because counsel did not object to inadmissible testimony from the rape victim's counselor, Patricia Parezo; and (2) his appellate counsel was ineffective because counsel failed to challenge the trial court's admission of the counselor's testimony. Rejecting these contentions, we affirm. 3 While presuming the correctness of the state court's…