Rodriguez

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Carmelo Rodriguez appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing that his confession, which was admitted at trial, was involuntary, and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney failed to object to its introduction. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the district court’s holding that Rodriguez *270 did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel. However, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on the question of the voluntariness of the confession.

Admissibility of the Confession

Rodriguez argues that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing in the district court on the issue of whether his confession was obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), or was otherwise involuntary. We agree that an evidentiary hearing is warranted.

Because Rodriguez’s petition was filed before the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), the act does not apply to this case. Whelchel v. Washington, 232 F.3d 1197, 1202 (9th Cir.2000). Under pre-AEDPA law, a habeas petitioner is entitled…