Carl Raymond Dolan v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent

21 F.3d 1112 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Carl Raymond DOLAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-35379. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 11, 1994. Decided March 29, 1994. Before: BROWNING, KOZINSKI and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Carl Raymond Dolan appeals the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 . 3 A. Dolan first argues he was denied due process when the trial judge failed to recuse himself because his former law partner had represented the victim many years earlier. However, Dolan waived his right to recusal under Oregon law. See Or.Rev.Stat. Sec. 14.210(2). Dolan was three times made aware--twice by counsel and once by the judge himself--of the judge's connection to the victim and of his right to ask for a new judge. 1 Appellee's Brief at 4 (citing Ex. 109, pp. 2-3; Ex. 114, App. 8). Yet, he chose not to exercise…