Haines

MEMORANDUM **

Juan Moreno Haines, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, see Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), and we affirm.

Haines first contends that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself. His contention fails because in order to properly invoke his right to represent himself, Haines had to assert the right in a timely manner. See Jackson v. Ylst, 921 F.2d 882, 888 (9th Cir.1990); United States v. Schaff, 948 F.2d 501, 503 (9th Cir.1991) (stating a demand for self-representation is timely if made before meaningful trial proceedings have begun, such as prior to jury selection, or before the jury is impaneled).

Haines next contends that his counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate other witnesses who could not identify the petitioner as the robber. 1 Haines’ counsel was not ineffective. He fails to show prejudice because he does not provide facts that support a reasonable probability these witnesses would have raised reasonable doubt respecting his guilt. See…