Michael T. Cooper-Smith v. Joan Palmateer

Caution
397 F.3d 1236·2005 WL 356974·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 2653
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 200503-35794California4,433 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nelson, J.

Michael Cooper-Smith appeals the district court’s denial of his writ of habeas corpus for alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court denied Petitioner’s habeas petition after declining to expand the record under Rule 7 of the Rules Governing 28 U.S.C. § 2254 cases. Petitioner objects to this decision. Petitioner also presents the uncertified issue that his sentence violated Apprendi v. New Jersey. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We affirm the district court's denial of Petitioner’s habeas petition and its decision not to expand the record under Rule 7. We decline to expand the Certificate of Appealability in order to reach Petitioner’s Apprendi issue.

I. Procedural History and Facts

A. Procedural History

Petitioner Michael Cooper-Smith sought federal habeas relief on the basis that, inter alia, (1) his state trial counsel (“Counsel”) rendered ineffective assistance when he failed to pursue a motion to suppress evidence seized from Petitioner’s home and to suppress eyewitness identifications; (2) Counsel rendered ineffective assistance when he failed to call Petitioner’s doctor, Dr. True, as a witness at Petitioner’s sentencing hearing; and…

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.