Thomas William Sinclair Richey v. Tana Wood

70 F.3d 120 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Thomas William Sinclair RICHEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Tana WOOD, Respondent-Appellee. No. 95-35340. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 24, 1995. * Decided Nov. 3, 1995. Before: BEEZER, THOMPSON, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Thomas W.S. Richey appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 . Richey contends: (1) the state appellate court violated his plea agreement; (2) the procedural bar imposed by the state court was inadequate to bar his sentencing claims; (3) and he demonstrated cause for his procedural default of his sentencing claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Secs. 2253 , 1291. We review de novo, Calderon v. Prunty, 59 F.3d 1005, 1008 (9th Cir.1995), and affirm. 3 Because Richey did not contend in his petition in the district court that the state court violated his plea agreement, we…