Bernard Depaoli v. Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General

103 F.3d 138 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Bernard DePAOLI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel E. LUNGREN, Attorney General, Respondent-Appellee. No. 96-15907. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 2, 1996. * Decided Dec. 06, 1996. Before: SNEED, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Bernard C. DePaoli, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, Duckett v. Godinez, 67 F.3d 734, 739 (9th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 1549 (1996), and affirm. 3 DePaoli contends that the trial court's denial of a continuance violated his right to effective assistance of counsel. We affirm the denial of relief on this claim for the reasons stated in the district court's thorough order filed on March 12, 1996. 4 Because DePaoli has failed to allege facts entitling him to relief, the district…