Frank E. Voth v. Manfred F. Maass

34 F.3d 1075 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Frank E. VOTH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Manfred F. MAASS, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-35106. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 23, 1994. * Decided Aug. 26, 1994. Before: WALLACE, Chief Judge, HUG and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Frank Voth, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his second 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 petition for habeas corpus as an abuse of the writ. Voth challenges his conviction for kidnapping and five counts of rape. We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a petition for habeas corpus as successive or abusive. See Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. 1, 18-19 (1963); Neuschafer v. Whitley, 860 F.2d 1470, 1474 (9th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 906 (1989). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 , and we affirm. 3 A second petition for habeas corpus relief is procedurally barred if "new and different grounds…