Ionel Claudio Radu v. George Smith, Warden Attorney General of the State of California

87 F.3d 1321 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ionel Claudio RADU, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George SMITH, Warden; Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 95-55689. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 12, 1996. * Decided June 18, 1996. Before: CANBY, NOONAN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ionel Claudio Radu, a California state prisoner, appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Radu contends that: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel, (2) his sentence was improperly enhanced based on an invalid prior conviction, and (3) California Penal Code § 667(a) (West 1988) violates the Equal Protection Clause. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and affirm. 1 3 We review de novo the denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Hendricks v. Calderon, 70 F.3d 1032, 1036 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct.…