Reed

Reed v. Schriro

Good Law
290 F. App'x 982
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 28, 2008No. 07-15916California1,181 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Kenneth W. Reed appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2258. We affirm.

First, Reed argues that the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial. Reed did not raise this claim in the Arizona Court of Appeals, however, so the district court correctly concluded that his claim was proeedurally defaulted. Castillo v. McFadden, 399 F.3d 993, 1000 (9th Cir.2005). The fact that the Arizona Court of Appeals complied with Reed’s general request to “search the record for fundamental error” was not sufficient to exhaust the claim. See id. at 999 . Moreover, Reed has not demonstrated cause and prejudice or “a fundamental miscarriage of justice” sufficient to excuse his procedural default. Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750 , 111 S.Ct. 2546 , 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991). In addition, he has not shown that there is any substantive merit to his speedy trial claim. See Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530 , 92 S.Ct. 2182 , 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972) (listing four-part test for speedy trial violation).

Second, Reed argues that the trial court violated his right…

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.