T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he H onor abl e J e d S . R a kof f , S e ni orU ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f or ** the S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof N e w Y ork, s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T A RTH U R G RA D Y G A RN ER, P e titio n e r- A p p e lla n t, v. B. A. M AY LE , R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 17862 D C N o . 4 : 9 9 - c v - 0 2 8 6 3 - CW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt for the N orthern D i stri ctof C al i forni a C l audi aA . W i l ke n, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d J ul y 20, 2011 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B e f or e : H U G a nd R A W L I N S O N , C i r c ui tJ udge s , a nd R A K O F F , S e ni or D i stri ctJudg e. ** P etit io n erA rth u r G ra d y G ar n er(“G ar n er ”) ap p ea ls fr o m th e d istrict co u rt’s ju d g m e n t d e n y in g h is 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 4 p e titio n f o raw r it o f

h ab e a s c o rp u s . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 2253. B e c aus e the pa r t i e s a r e f a m i l i a rw i th the 

# FI LED SEP 08 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

f a c tu a l a n d p r o c e d u r a l h is to ry o f th is c a s e , w e d o n o t r e c o u n t a d d itio n a l f a c ts e x c e p t a s n e c e s s a ry to e x p la in th e d e c is io n . W e a f f irm . G a rn e ra lle g e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t ab u s e d its d is c r e tio n in d e c lin in g to h o ld a n e v i d e n t i a ry h e a r i n g o n Garn e r ’ s i n e f f e c t i v e a s s i s t a n c e o f

c o u n s e l c l a i m . He ar gu es thathe re ce i ved i neff ec t i ve as si st ance of coun se l because hi s tri al coun se l purpor t e dl y f

a i l e d t o i nve s t i ga t e f

a c t s w hi c h w oul d ha ve i m pe a c he d the t e s t i m ony of the i nform ant , A rthu r R ay . W e di sa gree . A s an i ni t i al m att er , because tri al c ouns e l i s now de c e a s e d, G a rne rha s of f e r e d no di r e c te vi de nc e c onc e rni ng the s c o p e o rq u a lity o f

tr ia l c o u n s e l’s in v e s tig a tio n . G a rn e r ’s a r g u m e n t, th e r e f o r e , is pr e m i s e d e nt i r e l y on c urr e ntc ouns e l ’ s di s c ove ry of “ ne w e vi de nc e ” tha tw a s not pres ent ed t o the j ury. A s the di stri ctcourtfoun d, ho w ever , thi s e vi dence i s e i ther s pe c ul a t i ve orc um ul a t i ve of the e vi de nc e tha tw a s a dm i tt e d a ttr i a l . A f i tt i ng e x a m p le is th e M a r c h 2 6 , 1 9 9 2 a f f id a v it s ig n e d b y M ic h a e l A n th o n y , a n in m a te hous e d a tthe s a m e f

a c i l i ty a s G a rne r . I n tha ta f f i da vi t , A nthony a ve r s tha the no t i fi ed G arner thatR ayw as a w el l -kno w n j ai l ho use i nform ant . T hi s e vi dence, how e ve r , i s c um ul a t i ve of G a rne r ’ s t e s t i m ony tha the kne w R a y w a s a n i nf orm a nt a nd R a y ’ s ow n t e s t i m ony tha the w a s apr of e s s i ona l pol i c e i nf

orm a ntpa i d $50 f

or ea ch courtappearance. A cc ordi ng l y, even acc ept i ng al l of G arner’ s a l l egat i on s a s true , the y w oul d nots how tha thi s tr i a l c ouns e l ’ s i nve s t i ga t i on w a s unr e a s onabl e or3

tha thi s pe r f

orm a nc e f

e l l be l ow a n obj e c t i ve l y r e a s onabl e s t a nda r d. S e e S tr i c kl a nd v . W a s h in g to n , 4 6 6 U .S . 6 6 8 , 6 9 5 ( 1 9 8 4 ) . M oreover, t o m ake outa c l ai m for i neff ec t i ve as si st ance of coun se l , G arner m u s t s h o w th a t “th e r e is ar e a s o n ab le p r o b ab ility th a t, b u t f o rc o u n s e l's unpr of e s s i ona l e rr or s , the r e s ul tof the pr oc e e di ng w oul d ha ve be e n di f f e r e nt . ” I d. a t698. I n thi s c a s e , the e vi de nc e a ga i ns tG a rne ri nc l ude d, a m ong othe rthi ngs , the v icti m ’s id en ti fica ti o n o f G ar n eras th e s h o o ter. A lso , as in d icated ab o v e, R ay ’s testim o n y w as alre ad y th o ro u g h ly im p ea ch ed . A cc o rd in g ly, n o n e o f G ar n er ’s al l egat i on s, i f proven, w ou l d ent i t l e hi m t o rel i ef , and the di stri ctcourtthere fore di d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n d enyi ng G arner’ s c l ai m w i tho utan evi dent i ary hear i ng . S ee , e. g. , W es tv. R yan, 60 8 F . 3d 47 7, 48 5 (9th C i r. 20 10 ); (“ T o o bt ai n an e v id e n tia ry h e a r in g in d is tr ic t c o u r t, ah ab e a s p e titio n e rm u s t . . . a lle g e ac o lo r ab le c l a i m f orr e l i e f . ” ) ; C a s s e ttv. S t e w a r t , 406 F . 3d 614, 624 ( 9th C i r . 2005) ( hol di ng th a t “af e d e r a l c o u r t m a y d e n y a n u n e x h au s te d h ab e a s p e titio n o n th e m e r its . . . w hen i ti s per fe ct l y c l ea r thatthe appl i cantdo es no tra i se even a col orabl e f eder al c la im ” ) . W e h a v e c o n s id e r e d th e ap p e lla n ts ’ a d d itio n a l a r g u m e n ts a n d f in d th e m to be w i thoutm e r i t . I n pa r t i c ul a r , G a rne r ’ s unc e r t i f i e d c l a i m i s um m e r i t or i ous a nd w e dec l i ne t o add re ss i t . S ee 9th C i r. R . 22 -1(e ).4

A FFI R M ED .