Carl Vernon Dumler v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary

48 F.3d 1227 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Carl Vernon DUMLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-35569. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 15, 1995. * Decided Feb. 23, 1995. Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Carl Vernon Dumler, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for murder and burglary. Dumler contends that the state trial court denied him due process by failing sua sponte to order a competency hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 , and we affirm. 3 We review the denial of a habeas petition de novo. Cacoperdo v. Demosthenes, 37 F.3d 504, 506 (9th Cir.1994). "[T]he conviction of a defendant while legally incompetent violates due process." Id. at 510 . A defendant is competent to stand trial if he "has 'sufficient…