Wolf

Wolf v. Hennessy

Good Law
338 F. App'x 575
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 17, 2009No. 08-16213California874 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Tasha Christine Wolf appeals the district court’s denial of her habeas corpus petition.

A jury found Wolf guilty of the first degree murder of Sergio Elizondo and Jose de Jesus Toscano in 1995, as well as guilty of the kidnaping and robbery of the two men. She was sentenced to concurrent sentences of twenty-five years to life for each of these offenses. The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed her convictions and sentences. After exhausting her state remedies, she brought this habeas petition, which was denied by the district court.

Wolf argues that her right to counsel was violated because her trial counsel based her defense on duress — a defense barred by statute as a defense to murder or to kidnaping or robbery when serious physical injury is involved. A.R.S. § 13-412(C). The state court, taking into account all the facts, found the reliance on the nonexistent defense not to have preju *577 diced Wolf. We cannot say that this fact-bound conclusion was contrary to Supreme Court precedent that constituted the governing exposition of the Constitution at the time of trial. Wolf argues that counsel’s theory of defense led to his failure to attack vigorously the case…

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.