Pete Rogovich v. Charles L. Ryan

Good Law
694 F.3d 1094·2012 WL 4075750·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 19556
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 18, 201208-99015California5,316 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

Pete Carl Rogovich was convicted by an Arizona jury and sentenced to death for a 1992 killing spree in a Phoenix trailer park. His only defense at trial was insanity. He appeals the district court’s denial of habeas relief on three principal claims, each of which we have certified for appeal. First, he claims that the state trial court should not have permitted his counsel to present an insanity defense without first establishing on the record Rogovich’s consent to the defense. Second, he claims that his counsel on direct appeal was ineffective in failing to challenge the use of Arizona’s aggravating sentencing factor for a homicide involving multiple victims. Third, he claims that his counsel on direct appeal was ineffective in failing to challenge the prosecutor’s closing arguments. Reviewing de novo, Robinson v. Schriro, 595 F.3d 1086, 1099 (9th Cir.2010), we affirm the district court’s denial of habeas relief.

The Arizona Supreme Court denied Rogovich’s first claim on direct appeal. See State v. Rogovich, 188 Ariz. 38 , 932 P.2d 794 (1997). After the state courts denied post-conviction relief (“PCR”) on his other claims, Rogovich filed this petition for habeas corpus…

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.