Morris

Morris v. Attorney General of California

Good Law
36 F. App'x 235
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 22, 2002No. 00-56709; D.C. No. CV-99-06991-AHMCalifornia1,427 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

This is an appeal from a denial of a habeas petition. Quintín Morris (“Morris”) challenges his state conviction for attempted murder. Morris contends that the conviction was not supported by sufficient evidence, that the state trial court’s exclusion of demonstrative evidence deprived Morris of his right to present a complete defense, and that the California Court of Appeal’s alleged misapplication of state law in Morris’ state habeas proceedings violated his constitutional rights. The district court denied the habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm.

I

We review de novo the district court’s denial of habeas corpus relief. Bribiesca v. Galaza, 215 F.3d 1015, 1018 (9th Cir. 2000).

Federal district courts have jurisdiction to hear habeas petitions challenging the constitutionality of state convictions under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Morris’ petition was filed on July 8, 1999, and is therefore subject to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 amendments to § 2254. See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 327 , 117 S.Ct. 2059 , 138 L.Ed.2d 481 (1997).

Although the final California decision on the merits was a…

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.