Gary Eugene Kukes v. Arthur Calderon, Warden Attorney General, State of California

Good Law
79 F.3d 1153·1996 WL 119504·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 17197
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 199695-15976California553 words

Opinion

Opinion

79 F.3d 1153 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Gary Eugene KUKES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Arthur CALDERON, Warden; Attorney General, State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 95-15976. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 12, 1996. * Decided March 18, 1996. Before: GOODWIN, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Gary Eugene Kukes, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his second 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Kukes contends the district court erred when it denied his petition as an abuse of the writ. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review for abuse of discretion, Campbell v. Blodgett, 997 F.2d 512, 516 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1337 (1994), and affirm. 3 A petitioner abuses the writ of habeas corpus if he raises a new claim in a subsequent habeas petition that he could have raised in his first habeas petition. See McCleskey v.…

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.