Stoneman

ORDER & MEMORANDUM *

James Edward Stoneman, a State of Arizona prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition, which challenges his conviction and sentence for murder. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm.

Stoneman contends that his rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution were violated when, in answer to a question by Stone-man’s counsel, an officer said that Stone-man had indicated that he thought he wanted an attorney. Stoneman relies upon Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 619 , 96 S.Ct. 2240, 2245 , 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976), for that proposition. See also Wainwright v. Greenfield, 474 U.S. 284 , 295 & n. 13, 106 S.Ct. 634 , 640—41 & n. 13, 88 L.Ed.2d 623 (1986); United States v. Ross, 123 F.3d 1181, 1187 (9th Cir.1997); United States v. Kallin, 50 F.3d 689, 693 (9th Cir.1995).

Stoneman points to no authority that a brief passing reference like the one at hand, elicited by his own counsel and never again referred to or relied upon at trial, constitutes a Doyle violation. See Greer v. Miller, 483 U.S. 756 , 763—64, 107 S.Ct. 3102, 3108 , 97 L.Ed.2d 618 (1987); McMillan v. Gomez, 19 F.3d 465 , 469—70 (9th Cir.1994); cf.…