Roberts
Roberts v. Knowles
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Tharon Roberts (“Roberts”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2253 and 1291, and we affirm.
We review de novo the district court’s ruling denying a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. See Alcala v. Woodford, 334 F.3d 862, 868 (9th Cir.2003). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record even if it differs from the rationale of the district court. Id. A defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must demonstrate: (1) that counsel’s aetions were outside the wide range of professionally competent assistance, and (2) that the defendant was prejudiced by reason of counsel’s actions. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-90 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
Roberts’ claim fails because he cannot show that his trial counsel’s actions were outside the wide range of professionally competent assistance. Roberts’ petition alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object when the prosecutor asked Roberts on cross-examination at least thirty times whether previous…