Matney

Matney v. Stewart

Good Law
2 F. App'x 742
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 22, 2001No. 00-16037; D.C. No. CV-98-00348-WDBCalifornia1,006 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Randy Matney (“Matney”), an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for armed robbery. Matney contends that his due process rights were violated because the State breached the plea agreement. He also claims that the trial court violated the prohibition against double jeopardy by imposing an aggravated sentence based on dismissed allegations related to a prior offense.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, we review the district court’s denial of a section 2254 habeas corpus petition de novo, see Bribiesca v. Galaza, 215 F.3d 1015, 1018 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

Because Matney filed his habeas petition on July 28, 1998, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) applies. See Lopez v. Thompson, 202 F.3d 1110 , 1116 n. 5 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, we grant habeas relief only if the petitioner demonstrates that the state court’s adjudication of the merits “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.