Josey

Josey v. Roe

Good Law
16 F. App'x 676
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 1, 2001No. 00-55442; D.C. No. CV-99-06903-NMMCalifornia749 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

California state prisoner Willie Josey, Jr., appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging *677 his conviction for possession of cocaine base. Josey seeks to vacate his state court conviction on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to object to Josey’s being tried while wearing prison clothes. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2253 and 1291, and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s decision to deny a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Patterson v. Gomez, 223 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2000); Houston v. Roe, 177 F.3d 901, 905 (9th Cir.1999).

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, we may grant a habeas writ only if the state court decision is “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 need not have addressed a factually identical case[;] § 2254(d) only requires that the Supreme Court clearly determine the law.” Houston, 177 F.3d at 906 . “[0]ur independent review of the legal question ... [must]…

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.