Bone

Bone v. Mahoney

Good Law
66 F. App'x 670
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 25, 2003No. 00-35913; D.C. No. CV-98-96-GF (DWM)California1,200 words

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…

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.