Ferguson

Ferguson v. Schwarzenegger

Good Law
267 F. App'x 707
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 25, 2008No. 07-15246California1,503 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

*708 MEMORANDUM ***

Randall Ferguson appeals the denial by the district court of his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We review that decision de novo. Campbell v. Rice, 408 F.3d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). 1 The single issue raised by Ferguson on appeal is “[w]hether petitioner was denied his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel and his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process when the trial court denied him his right to discharge retained counsel on the day of sentencing and to continue the matter to obtain substitute retained counsel.” Appellant’s Brief at 2.

On the day of his sentencing in state court and without any prior notice, Ferguson through his retained counsel (ie., Eric Bates) made an oral motion to continue it in order to obtain a “second opinion of another attorney .... [a]s to the whole overall process of the trial that took place.” Appellant’s Excerpt of Record [“AER”] at 49-50. When the trial judge indicated that he would not grant a continuance for that reason, Ferguson stated he “was trying to

hire Mr. Hatcher, but he’s been in the hospital, in order to represent me through the sentencing....”…

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.