Jann R. Oslund v. Manfred Maass

56 F.3d 73 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Jann R. OSLUND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-35846. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 5, 1995. Decided May 24, 1995. Before: BROWNING, REAVLEY, * and NORRIS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 * Oslund's fourth amendment, sixth amendment, and due process claims are premised on the allegation that the police began taping Oslund's conversation with Logan Conley before receiving word the state judge had approved the body wire. The state court found to the contrary, and its finding is presumed correct on federal habeas review. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (d); Sumner v. Mata, 449 U.S. 539, 550 (1981). Oslund does not claim any of the Sec. 2254(d) factors are applicable here, nor do they appear to be applicable upon our own review of the record. II 3 The district court did not err in dismissing the three new sixth amendment claims raised in Oslund's…