Ramirez

Ramirez v. Castro

Good Law
119 F. App'x 44
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 2004No. 03-16812California327 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner William Ramirez appeals the district court’s denial of *45 his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. He is currently serving a 26 year-to-life sentence for murder. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

The district court’s decision to grant or deny a habeas petition is reviewed de novo. See Van Lynn v. Farmon, 347 F.3d 735, 738 (9th Cir.2003). This court may grant habeas relief only if the state court adjudication was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, as determined by the United States Supreme Court. See 28 USC § 2254 (d)(1), (2); Van Lynn, 347 F.3d at 738 .

Ramirez contends that his due process rights were violated because the judge who presided over his adult criminal trial lacked jurisdiction to do so under state law. Whether the judge lacked jurisdiction to try the adult criminal case is a matter of state law that has been resolved against the petitioner in state court. This court is bound by a state court’s interpretation of its own law. See Hubbart v. Knapp, 379 F.3d 773, 779-80 (9th Cir.2004).

Ramirez also contends that both his trial and appellate counsel were…

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.