Manzano

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner James Manzano (“Manzano”) appeals the judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his California conviction for manslaughter. Man-zano alleges that he received ineffective assistance when his trial counsel failed to object to the addition of the felon-in-possession charge. Manzano also alleges due process violations based on inappropriate jury instructions and an erroneous eviden-tiary ruling. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and affirm.

Manzano was- charged with second-degree murder of Matt McRavin (“McRa-vin”), but later received a second count when the government was permitted to make an untimely amendment to the indictment by charging Manzano as a felon in possession of a firearm. By failing to object to the new charge, Manzano’s then-counsel sowed the seeds of an appeal to the state courts, and of this habeas proceeding. Because the felon-in-possession count was not yet known to be inappropriate, the murder trial proceeded through instructions and verdict as if Manzano had *13 been, in the eyes of the law, as he was in fact, a felon who used a gun.

On his state appeal, Manzano succeeded in obtaining a ruling by the…