Vaughn

MEMORANDUM *

The California Supreme Court denied Vaughn’s habeas petition by way of a citation to In re Dixon, 41 Cal.2d 756, 759 , 264 P.2d 513 (1953). In Dixon , the California Supreme Court ruled that a petitioner may *828 not raise matters in a habeas petition that could have been, but were not, raised on direct appeal. See id.

We must determine whether Dixon rests upon an independent and adequate state ground. If so, habeas relief is procedurally barred. Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 729-30 , 111 S.Ct. 2546 , 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991).

In In re Robbins, 18 Cal.4th 770 , 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 153 , 959 P.2d 311 (1998), the California Supreme Court explicitly ruled that it would no longer consider whether an error alleged in a state petition constituted a federal constitutional violation. Id. at 811-12 , 77 Cal.Rptr.2d 153 , 959 P.2d 311 . The California Supreme Court’s directed focus on state issues to the exclusion of federal issues rendered the Robbins case an independent state procedural rule for the purpose of federal habeas review. See Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1040 , 103 S.Ct. 3469 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1201 (1983); see also Park v. California, 202 F.3d 1146, 1152 (9th…