Porfilio

Porfilio v. Hubbard

Good Law
11 F. App'x 973
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 14, 2001No. 00-56340; D.C. No. CV-99-02912-RSWLCalifornia599 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Donald Porfilio, a California state prisoner, appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his jury trial conviction for second degree murder. We review the district court’s decision to deny a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition de novo, see Laboa v. Calderon, 224 F.3d 972, 976 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.

Porfilio contends that the admission at trial of his inculpatory statements to a police detective without an attorney present violated his due process rights because he made the statements absent a knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of his Miranda rights. We conclude that the state courts’ rulings that there was no violation of Porfilio’s Miranda rights because he impliedly waived them were neither “contrary to, [n]or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law,” as is required for habeas relief under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1); see also Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 385-86 , 120 S.Ct. 1495, 1509 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000).

In order for a confession obtained during a custodial interrogation to be…

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.