Dennis Brackett v. William Duncan, Warden James Gomez, Director Attorney General of the State of California

26 F.3d 129 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Dennis BRACKETT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William DUNCAN, Warden; James Gomez, Director; Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-55614. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 6, 1994. * Decided June 14, 1994. Before: TANG, PREGERSON, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Dennis Brackett, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas petition. We review de novo, Norris v. Risley, 878 F.2d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir.1989), and we affirm. 3 * Brackett contends that he was deprived of his right to a fair trial because, he alleges, both the trial judge and defense counsel were actually members of the Riverside County District Attorney's Office at the time of his trial. The district court correctly rejected this claim for relief because it was not supported by any reliable evidence. See Boehme…