940 F. 2d 667 - Ennis v. Goldsmith
940 F2d 667 Ennis v. Goldsmith
940 F.2d 667
Unpublished Disposition
Curtis Lee ENNIS, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Bob GOLDSMITH, Warden, Attorney General of the State of
Arizona, Respondents-Appellees.
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Advertisement
No. 90-16030.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted July 16, 1991.*
Decided July 18, 1991.
As Amended on Motion to Recall Mandate
Dec. 17, 1992.
Before CHOY and SNEED, Circuit Judges, and KELLEHER,** District Judge.
MEMORANDUM***
The petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was found by the district court to be barred from consideration by reason of procedural default. The petitioner failed to present a timely petition for review to the Arizona Supreme Court. The alleged errors in his trial did not create actual prejudice. No constitutional error infected his trial.
AFFIRMED.
Order.
Advertisement
Dec. 17, 1992.
Petitioner alleges he properly exhausted his state remedies because in June 1989 the state trial court gave him leave to file a delayed petition for review. However, petitioner never filed a petition pursuant to the trial court's June 1989 grant. Therefore, his action is barred by procedural default.
The panel has amended its memorandum disposition of July 18,1991; a copy of the amended disposition is attached. With thememorandum disposition so amended, petitioner's motion to recall themandate is hereby denied.
The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without argument pursuant to 9th Cir.R. 34-4 and Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)
Honorable Robert J. Kelleher, District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3