Heidelbach

Heidelbach v. Stewart

Good Law
44 F. App'x 251
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 15, 2002No. 01-16750; D.C. No. CV-00-01170-MHMCalifornia300 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Rick Martin Heidelbach appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his Arizona conviction and sentence for aggravated assault. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal of a habeas corpus petition on procedural grounds, see La Crosse v. Kernan, 244 F.3d 702, 704 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

This court granted a certificate of ap-pealability (“COA”) on the sole issue of whether certain of Heidelbach’s claims which were never presented to the Arizona state court are procedurally defaulted. 1 Heidelbach fails to demonstrate cause for his default and actual prejudice, or that failure to consider the claims will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice. See Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750 , 111 S.Ct. 2546 , 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991). Although Heidelbach also claims to be actually innocent of a felony, his petition does not meet the requirements of Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 , 115 S.Ct. 851 , 130 L.Ed.2d 808 (1995).

Accordingly, we conclude that the district court properly ruled that Heidel-bach’s claims are procedurally defaulted. Id. We decline to…

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.