Case ID: f-appx_194/html/0479-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eric John HASELTON, Petitioner— Appellant, v. Claude FINN, Warden, Respondent— Appellee.
    No. 05-16892.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 27, 2006.
    
    Decided July 31, 2006.
    John Ward, Esq., Law Offices of John Ward, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Marcia A. Fay, Esq., Brian Means, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: T.G. NELSON, SILVERMAN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Eric John Haselton (Haselton) fails to demonstrate that “an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer’s performance.” Earp v. Ornoski, 431 F.3d 1158, 1183 (9th Cir.2005), as amended (citation omitted).

The district court properly denied Haselton’s habeas petition, as the California Court of Appeal’s finding of no actual conflict was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law. See Lambert v. Blodgett, 393 F.3d 943, 986 (9th Cir.2004) (explaining that the United States Supreme Court has never held that joint representation of criminal co-defendants automatically constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       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.