Walters

Walters v. Ignacio

Good Law
97 F. App'x 751
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 2004No. 03-16917California348 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*752 MEMORANDUM **

Nevada state prisoner Richard H. Walters appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as second or successive.

Walters filed a § 2254 petition in 1995, raising a double jeopardy violation, which the district court dismissed as procedurally barred. In 2000, Walters filed another § 2254 petition, again raising the double jeopardy violation, and adding a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court dismissed this petition as second or successive, and granted the certificate of appealability. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and we affirm.

First, Walters contends that because his 1995 petition was improperly dismissed, his 2000 petition is not second or successive. Because Walters raises this contention for the first time on appeal, it is waived. See Poland v. Stewart, 169 F.3d 573 , 576 n. 4 (9th Cir.1999).

Second, Walters contends that his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, contained only in his 2000 petition, is a “new” claim that was not cognizable when he filed his 1995 petition. We disagree. Walters’ “new” claim does not fall within one of the narrow exceptions to 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(2).…

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.