Prunty
Williams v. Prunty
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Gregory Williams appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 & 2253 and we AFFIRM. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the case, we do not recount it here except as necessary to explain our decision.
Williams argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel as a result of his trial attorney’s failure to adequately investigate and provide witnesses who may have provided an alibi. To establish a prima facie claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Williams bears the burden of establishing both that his counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. See United States v. Quintero-Barraza, 78 F.3d 1344, 1348 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 848 , 117 S.Ct. 135 , 136 L.Ed.2d 83 (1996).
There exists a “strong presumption that counsel ‘rendered adequate assistance and made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment.’ ” United States v. Palomba, 31 F.3d 1456, 1460 (9th Cir.1994) (quoting Strickland v.…