Cruz

Cruz v. Herman

Good Law
12 F. App'x 537
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 21, 2001No. 99-17519; D.C. No. CV-98-00896-SMMCalifornia306 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Tommy Anthony Cruz, a California state prisoner, appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his convictions for second-degree murder and assault. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (a), and we affirm.

We review the district court’s denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition de novo. See Dows v. Wood, 211 F.3d 480, 484 (9th Cir.2000). Cruz bears the burden of showing that the state court adjudication of the merits of his claim “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 States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d); Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 , 120 S.Ct. 1495, 1523 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000); Van Tran v. Lindsey, 212 F.3d 1143, 1153-54 (9th Cir.2000) (defining “unreasonable application” as involving situations where the state court has committed clear error).

Cruz contends that his right to due process was violated when the Arizona trial court, at his trial for first degree murder, allowed the reading of jury instructions as to the lesser included offenses of second degree murder and…

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.