Michael C. Davis v. Jerry Stainer, Warden Dan Lungren, Attorney General for the State of California

52 F.3d 332 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Michael C. DAVIS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jerry STAINER, Warden; Dan Lungren, Attorney General for the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-56663. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 4, 1995. * Decided April 10, 1995. Before: BROWNING, SNEED, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Michael C. Davis, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas petition. The district court dismissed Davis's petition as an abuse of the writ. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 . We review for an abuse of discretion, Campbell v. Blodgett, 997 F.2d 512, 516 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1337 (1994), and affirm. 3 A petitioner abuses the writ of habeas corpus if he raises a new claim in a subsequent habeas petition that he could have raised in his first habeas petition. Rule 9(b), 28 U.S.C.…