Vance J. Moriel v. K.W. Prunty, Warden Attorney General of the State of California

101 F.3d 706 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Vance J. MORIEL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. K.W. PRUNTY, Warden; Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 95-56573. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 8, 1996. * Decided Nov. 13, 1996. Before: BROWNING, THOMPSON and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Vance J. Moriel appeals from the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm. 3 The district court found that Moriel brought his motion to proceed pro se as a delaying tactic. We review this finding for clear error. United States v. Smith, 780 F.2d 810, 812 (9th Cir.1986). 4 The basis for Moriel's desire to proceed pro se was his counsel's alleged lack of interest in and commitment to his defense. Moriel had ample opportunity to raise his motion earlier. He had expressed dissatisfaction with his counsel as early as August 1987,…