Thomas

Thomas v. Castro

Good Law
69 F. App'x 399
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 2003No. 01-56797; D.C. No. CV-00-10989-LGBCalifornia128 words

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The district court did not err in dismissing the petitioner’s habeas corpus petition with prejudice. Appellate counsel’s decision not to raise on appeal the trial court’s denial of a continuance did not fall “below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Because the trial court has considerable discretion with respect to granting continuances, United States v. Tham, 960 F.2d 1391, 1396 (9th Cir.1991), and fully supported its ruling denying the continuance, appellate counsel reasonably could have *400 believed this argument would be unsuccessful.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.