Alford

Alford v. Schomig

Good Law
254 F. App'x 594
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 2007No. 06-17015California2,586 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner Frederick Edson Alford, Jr. (“Alford”) petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that his trial counsel were ineffective, that he involuntarily entered an Alford plea to first degree murder and home invasion, and that his appellate counsel were ineffective. We affirm the district court’s denial of habeas corpus.

The parties are familiar with the facts of this case, so we do not repeat them except where necessary.

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), we may grant habeas relief from a state conviction only if the state court’s decision is contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established law as determined by the United States Supreme Court, or based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state courts. Mitchell v. Esparza, 540 U.S. 12, 15 , 124 S.Ct. 7 , 157 L.Ed.2d 263 (2003). A state court’s factual determinations may not be overturned unless we are convinced “that an appellate panel, applying the normal standards of appellate review, could not reasonably conclude that the finding is supported by the record.” Taylor v. Maddox, 366 F.3d 992, 1000 (9th…

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.