Robert Anthony Hungerschafer v. People of the State of California Brad Gates, Sheriff

91 F.3d 152 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Anthony HUNGERSCHAFER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. PEOPLE OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA; Brad Gates, Sheriff, Respondents-Appellees. No. 95-56761. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 9, 1996. * Decided July 15, 1996. Before: HUG, Chief Judge, SCHROEDER and POOLE, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Robert Anthony Hungerschafer appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his guilty plea conviction for driving while under the influence of alcohol. Hungerschafer contends that the district court erred by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing and permit discovery on his claims that his attorney was ineffective during his guilty plea to driving under the influence of alcohol and at sentencing. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo the district court's denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus,…