Leo Newton Maxwell v. George Deeds, Warden

29 F.3d 633 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Leo Newton MAXWELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George DEEDS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-17298. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 20, 1994. Decided July 20, 1994. * Before: CHOY, SKOPIL, FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Leo Maxwell appeals pro se the district court's denial of his petition for habeas relief. He contends that the district court wrongly rejected his arguments that he was charged with an unlawfully amended indictment, that the state trial court should therefore not have accepted his guilty plea, and that his attorney was incompetent for advising him to plea guilty to the infirm indictment. We agree with the district court that Maxwell's attack on the lawfulness of the indictment is a question of state law that is not reviewable in federal habeas. See Campbell v. Blodgett, 997 F.2d 512, 522 (9th Cir. (1992), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1337 (1994). Maxwell…