Carter

I respectfully dissent. Harold Carter (“Carter”) failed to meet the standards set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), to establish ineffective assistance of counsel. Although Carter specified several claimed deficiencies of trial counsel, he submitted no records, affidavits or other documentary support for his claim. At oral argument, Carter’s appellate counsel conceded the inadequacy of Carter’s showing. We require petitioners *630 claiming ineffective assistance of counsel to affirmatively demonstrate prejudice. Cooper v. Calderon, 255 F.3d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir.2001). Carter demonstrably failed to do so. Accordingly, I would affirm the district court’s dismissal of Carter’s petition.

MEMORANDUM

Harold Wayne Carter appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition in which he asserted ineffective assistance of counsel at his state trial. Carter was accused of molesting his daughter, “G”, and his stepdaughter, “A”. His conviction was based principally on the testimony of the two complaining "witnesses, step-sisters who lived together in the same house. 2 At trial, “G” testified that she was regularly molested during the summer of 1991, that the molestations occurred “every day or every other day,” and that they occurred only when Carter drove her in the Scout vehicle to feed the cattle on the ranch. Carter denied these accusations. He testified that the cattle were not fed during the summer because they were kept on an irrigated pasture, and that, accordingly, he could not have driven her out to feed the cattle during that time frame. Carter also said that he could not have driven her in the Scout as “G” claimed because it was inoperable and in need of repairs until December of 1991, and because Carter’s mother had the only key to that vehicle. Carter’s mother testified at the trial and corroborated these statements.

According to affidavits filed…