Frazier

Frazier v. Lamarque

Good Law
14 F. App'x 801
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 28, 2001No. 01-55042; D.C. No. CV-00-05644-NMCalifornia279 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Anthony Lee Frazier appeals the denial of his habeas petition, renewing his argument that the state court violated his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation. We agree with the district court that no constitutional violation occurred. Accordingly, we affirm.

DISCUSSION

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) applies because Frazier filed his petition after AEDPA’s effective date. See La Crosse v. Kernan, 244 F.3d 702 , 704 n. 2 (9th Cir.2001). Relief may be granted under the AEDPA only if the state court’s decision “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)(1). The Supreme Court has established that the Sixth Amendment grants a criminal defendant the right of self-representation in criminal proceedings. See Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 807 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). Frazier, however, was not denied that right.

The state court agreed to allow Frazier to represent himself, but refused to continue the trial. Nonetheless, for reasons unrelated to Frazier’s request, trial was continued for…

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.