Curtis

Curtis v. Alameida

Good Law
244 F. App'x 781
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 27, 2007No. 05-55790California650 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Tony Leavon Curtis, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial *782 of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Reviewing the district court’s decision de novo, Nunes v. Mueller, 350 F.3d 1045, 1051 (9th Cir.2003), we affirm the denial of habeas relief.

Three issues have been certified for appeal: (1) whether the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of two witnesses during trial, and if so, whether there was resulting prejudice; (2) whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to object to the prosecutor’s comments as vouching; and (3) whether appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to argue the issue of vouching on direct appeal. Because no state court adjudicated the merits of Curtis’s prosecutorial vouching claim, we consider de novo whether a due process violation occurred. See Pirtle v. Morgan, 313 F.3d 1160, 1167 (9th Cir.2002). As to his remaining claims, we consider, under the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, whether the state court’s adjudication was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable…

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.