Benge

MEMORANDUM **

Robert Joseph Benge appeals from the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We conclude that Benge is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 .

First, Benge contends that the thirteen-month delay between his indictment and the start of his trial violated his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial. The district court correctly determined that Benge exhausted his state remedies by fairly presenting this claim to the Arizona courts. Baldwin v. Reese, — U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 1347, 1351 , 158 L.Ed.2d 64 (2004); Swoopes v. Sublett, 196 F.3d 1008, 1008-10 (9th Cir.1999).

As to the merits, we affirm the district court’s conclusion that the Arizona Court of Appeals’ failure to find a speedy trial violation was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly-established federal law; nor did it result from an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented. Applying the balancing analysis set forth by the Supreme Court in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972), we conclude that neither the length of the delay nor the reasons for it weigh heavily in Benge’s favor.…