Ronald R. Wright v. Robert Borg Dan Lungren, Attorney General of the State of California

28 F.3d 111 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ronald R. WRIGHT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert BORG; Dan Lungren, Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-55542. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 7, 1994. * Decided May 23, 1994. Before: HALL, LEAVY, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ronald Wright 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 he was denied a fair trial when the prosecutor improperly commented on the evidence, he was denied due process as the result of faulty jury instructions, and his sentence was unlawfully enhanced. We reject these contentions and affirm. 3 * Wright refused to participate in a police line-up, despite having been warned that his refusal could be used against him in court as evidence of his guilt. At trial the prosecutor argued to the jury that…