Kelvin E. Patterson v. K.W. Prunty, Warden

Good Law
83 F.3d 428·1996 WL 183471·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 28635
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 12, 199694-56735California708 words

Opinion

Opinion

83 F.3d 428 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Kelvin E. PATTERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. K.W. PRUNTY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-56735. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 10, 1996. * Decided April 12, 1996. Before: HALL, THOMPSON, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Kelvin E. Patterson, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. Following a jury trial, Patterson was convicted of attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon. Patterson contends that the trial court violated his due process rights by erroneously excluding defense evidence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, Calderon v. Prunty, 59 F.3d 1005, 1008 (9th Cir.1995), and affirm. 3 "A state court's evidentiary ruling is grounds for federal habeas corpus relief only if it renders the state proceeding so fundamentally unfair as to violate due…

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.