Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

108 F.3d 337

Docket No. 96-16066.

Ellis v. Pinkins

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Feb. 10, 1997.* Decided Feb. 14, 1997.

This page is marked noindex.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1997-02-14

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on David S. Harrison v. Larry A. Burns Alan Scott Pace, Does 1-25 United States of America James W. Brannigan R. Scott Parkhurst Jim Allison

Decided 1997-02-14

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Before: BRUNETTI, FERNANDEZ and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

¶1

MEMORANDUM…

¶2

Rickey Richard Ellis, a California state prison inmate, appeals the denial of his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Ellis alleges deprivation of his right to trial by an impartial jury, his right to due process, and his right against self-incrimination.

¶3

Ellis made these same claims in the district court, which found them lacking in merit. We agree. The district court denied Ellis relief in a well-reasoned Order filed April 29, 1996. Confident that we could not improve upon the writing or reasoning of the district court, we adopt the reasoning of the district court and AFFIRM its decision.

*

The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without argument pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 34(a) and Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

…

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

/108/f3d/337 · .json · Public domain