Killedjian
Killedjian v. Small
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jerry Killedjian appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm.
Killedjian claims that at his trial and conviction for first degree murder, his counsel was ineffective. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688-95 , 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2064-68, 2066, 2069 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Wildman v. Johnson, 261 F.3d 832, 838 (9th Cir.2001); Caro v. Calderon, *501 165 F.3d 1223, 1226 (9th Cir.1999); Campbell v. Wood, 18 F.3d 662, 673 (9th Cir.1994). But for the case at hand, the most salient part of ineffective assistance law is the Supreme Court’s admonition that:
Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689 , 104 S.Ct. at 2065 (internal citations omitted).
That is most apposite here because what the record demonstrates beyond peradventure is that the accusations that counsel was ineffective key on two highly problematic arguments about issues and evidence not pursued at trial. But counsel’s failure to expend more effort (both before and during trial) on the brake issue and his failure to call two witnesses, who actually contradicted his own client’s statements, do not demonstrate ineffectiveness. Nor can counsel’s alleged omissions…