Tran

Tran v. Lamarque

Good Law
172 F. App'x 722
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 24, 2006No. 04-55921California1,319 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Scott Tran appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, from a state conviction on aiding and abetting second-degree murder. For the reasons set forth below, we decline to find that prejudice accrued when Tran’s counsel did not: (1) object to or seek a limiting instruction regarding the admission of videotaped interrogations; (2) request a jury instruction on voluntary intoxication; (3) request exclusion of a gang expert’s testimony; and (4) request the striking of an allegedly improper prosecutorial comment. Finally, we do not agree with Tran’s contention that the cumulative effect of his counsel’s errors prejudiced the defense. We affirm.

First, Tran argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to or request a limiting instruction regarding two unedited police interrogation videotapes that contained hearsay, speculation, and personal opinions by the officers. To prevail under the standard set out in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), Tran must show deficient performance by his counsel, and that this…

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.