Arturo Lopez Rojas v. John M. Ratelle, Warden Daniel E. Lungren

26 F.3d 132 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Arturo Lopez ROJAS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John M. RATELLE, Warden; Daniel E. Lungren, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-55455. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 6, 1994. * Decided June 9, 1994. Before: HALL, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Arturo Lopez Rojas appeals pro se from the district court's denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing that he was entitled to federal habeas relief because his Sixth Amendment rights were violated when the state trial court refused to permit him to represent himself, and because his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. We reject these contentions and affirm. 3 In order properly to invoke his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself, Rojas had to assert the right in a timely manner. See United States v. Schaff, 948 F.2d 501, 503 (9th Cir.1991). "[A] demand for self-representation is timely if made…