Charles L. Boylan v. Sam Sublett Grant Woods, Attorney General of the State of Arizona

97 F.3d 1458 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Charles L. BOYLAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sam SUBLETT; Grant Woods, Attorney General of the State of Arizona, Respondents-Appellees. No. 96-15742. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 10, 1996. * Decided Sept. 13, 1996. Before: FLETCHER, BRUNETTI, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Charles L. Boylan, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his guilty plea conviction for theft and burglary. Boylan contends that: (1) the trial court violated his constitutional rights by refusing to appoint an expert psychiatrist to examine his mental state; (2) his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately investigate an insanity defense or properly advise Boylan regarding this defense; (3) trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present mitigating evidence at sentencing; and (4) the…