Jose Ortiz-Sandoval v. Linda Clarke, Warden

Good Law
323 F.3d 1165·2003 WL 1480565·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2602·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 5697
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 25, 200302-15291California3,411 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gould, J.

Petitioner Jose Ortiz-Sandoval (hereinafter “Sandoval”) appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on March 16, 1999. In his petition, Sandoval raises a Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on his trial counsel’s failure to object to a warrantless entry into his personal residence. In exhaustion proceedings, the Santa Clara County Superior Court denied the petition on the merits, holding that the warrantless entry was justified by exigent circumstances or, in the alternative, that the evidence would have been admitted under the inevitable discovery doctrine. Both the California Court of Appeals and the California Supreme Court summarily denied the petition.

We address two issues on appeal: (1) whether this petition constitutes a second or successive petition that is barred from review; and (2) whether the state court denial of Sandoval’s claim for ineffective assistance of counsel was contrary to or an unreasonable application of Supreme Court law. We have jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we deny the petition.

I

On November 17, 1989, in…

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.