Rocha

53 F.3d 337 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. VAN ALEXANDER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ROCHA, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-16671. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 19, 1995. * Decided April 27, 1995. Before: BROWNING, SNEED, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Charles Van Alexander, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's summary dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 petition. Van Alexander was convicted of one count of infliction of corporal injury on a spouse in violation of California Penal Code Sec. 273.5(a) and was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment. He contends the district court erred when it dismissed his petition for failure to state a federal question. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 . We review de novo, Hendricks v. Zenon, 993 F.2d 664, 668 (9th Cir. 1993), and we vacate and remand. 3 On August 1, 1994, the district court found Van Alexander's state…