Case Name: Wells Walter MOORE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert LAMPERT, Supt. SRCI, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-06-30
Citations: 328 F. App'x 407
Docket Number: No. 08-35109
Parties: Wells Walter MOORE, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Robert LAMPERT, Supt. SRCI, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 407–408

Head Matter:
Wells Walter MOORE, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Robert LAMPERT, Supt. SRCI, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 08-35109.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 16, 2009.
Filed June 30, 2009.
Thomas J. Hester, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDOR-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Portland, OR, for Petitioner-Appellant.
David B. Thompson, Assistant Attorney General, AGOR-Office of the Oregon Attorney General, Salem, OR, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Oregon state prisoner Wells Walter Moore, Jr., appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Moore contends that his trial counsel was ineffective because she failed to advise him that the U.S. Supreme Court's then-recent decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), prevented him from being sentenced as a dangerous offender, pursuant to former Oregon Revised Statutes § 161.725 and 161.737. We conclude that the state court's rejection of this claim was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 58-60, 106 S.Ct. 366, 88 L.Ed.2d 203 (1985); Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 692-96, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.