Bone
Bone v. Mahoney
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Petitioner Robert Bone (“Bone”) pled guilty to a double homicide and was sentenced to 100 years imprisonment. He appeals the denial of his habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
Bone first challenges the state court’s conclusion that he was not prejudiced by his counsel’s failure to investigate the effects of his Haldol medication, and, in particular, the finding that the Haldol did not negatively affect Bone.
The state court’s finding is not clearly erroneous. See Green v. White, 232 F.3d 671 , 672 n. 3 (9th Cir.2000) (applying clearly erroneous standard to state habeas court’s factual findings). The state trial court reviewed the five hours of videotaped statements and concluded that Bone was “lucid, responsive and capable of making intelligent answers to questions.” Bone asserts that the court erred in relying on the videotape rather than on petitioner’s expert, Dr. Rich. Because Dr. Rich did not evaluate Bone during the time period in question or review the videotape, he could not and did not testify that Bone’s behavior prior to the entry of his guilty pleas was consistent with—or at least not inconsistent with—Bone suffering from…