Larry E. Santos v. Daniel E. Lungren, and P. Koehane, Warden

78 F.3d 594 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Larry E. SANTOS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Daniel E. LUNGREN, and P. Koehane, Warden, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-16209. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 12, 1996. Decided Feb. 29, 1996. Before: SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Larry Eugene Santos appeals the district court's dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . While incarcerated in a federal penitentiary for bank robbery, Santos pleaded guilty to state charges of attempted burglary on November 21, 1990. He contends that the state conviction is void because the Santa Clara County, California District Attorney (hereinafter "prosecutor") violated the 180-day speedy trial provision of Article III(a) of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act ("IAD"), 18 U.S.C.App. § 2, Cal.Penal…