Adams

Adams v. Castro

Good Law
224 F. App'x 623
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 8, 2007No. 06-15111California367 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Allen Ray Adams appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition challenging his first degree murder conviction for killing the victim by striking him on the head with a baseball bat. The petitioner was seventeen at the time.

The scope of our review under AEDPA is narrow. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Adams claims he received ineffective assistance of counsel in a number of respects. None suggests both a deficiency of performance and resulting prejudice sufficient to constitute a violation of federal rights under AEDPA and Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

The failure of counsel, for example, to suggest that Adams and his group of friends together purchased three 12-packs of beer rather than two does not indicate the level of Adams’ intoxication, or his ability to form intent to strike the victim. Nor was counsel shown to have acted unreasonably in putting Dr. Pittel on the stand, despite Dr. Pittel’s prior arrest for cocaine use, as counsel could not reasonably have anticipated that the arrest would be used for impeachment. Moreover, the record does not suggest that there was other readily available expert…

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.