Wildin

Wildin v. Thompson

Good Law
110 F. App'x 845
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 14, 2004No. 03-36029; D.C. No. CV-99-00204-AACalifornia302 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Richard Bruce Wildin was convicted by a jury of first degree manslaughter in Oregon state court on June 23, 1995. He was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and 36 months post-prison supervision. He now appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition challenging his conviction on the ground that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to test physical evidence seized at the crime scene and he was prejudiced thereby. We affirm the decision of the district court.

We review a district court’s decision to deny a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition de novo. See Taylor v. Maddox, 366 F.3d 992, 997 (9th Cir.2004). Habeas relief may be granted if a state court’s decision “[w]as contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1); Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 71 , 123 S.Ct. 1166 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003).

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, petitioner must prove: (1) that “counsel’s performance was deficient” and (2) that “the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.”…

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.