Medley

Medley v. Runnels

Good Law
188 F. App'x 580
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 30, 2006No. 05-55295California824 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*581 MEMORANDUM ***

Theodore Beech Medley appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for murder in state court. Medley alleges that (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney ignored Medley’s requests to testify; (2) the state trial violated his constitutional rights by failing to instruct the jury on a necessary element of the sentence enhancement Medley received; and (8) Medley received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial and appellate counsel both failed to contest the jury instructions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the district court’s denial of Medley’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Since Medley’s petition was filed after the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), we can only overturn Medley’s conviction if the state court decision affirming his conviction was “an unreasonable application of ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). Since Medley argues that his attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by…

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.