Robert A. Sorensen v. Michael Mahoney

Good Law
87 F.3d 1322·1996 WL 341265·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 31497
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 19, 199695-35576California1,441 words

Opinion

Opinion

87 F.3d 1322 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Robert A. SORENSEN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael MAHONEY, Respondent-Appellee. No. 95-35576. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 19, 1996. Before: CANBY, NOONAN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Robert A. Sorensen, a Montana state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his second 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. Sorensen alleges that: (1) the trial court erred by admitting the testimony of a coconspirator, (2) he was arrested, his home searched, and his property seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and (3) he received ineffective assistance of counsel both at trial and on appeal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and affirm. 3 * Successive Claims 4 Sorensen contends that: (1) the trial court erred by admitting the testimony of coconspirator Wayne Wagner, and (2) his arrest, and the search and…

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.