Case Name: Charles MCMANUS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Terry L. STEWART, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-13
Citations: 104 F. App'x 660
Docket Number: No. 03-16676; D.C. No. CV-02-00478-MHM
Parties: Charles MCMANUS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Terry L. STEWART, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 104
Pages: 660–660

Head Matter:
Charles MCMANUS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Terry L. STEWART, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 03-16676.
D.C. No. CV-02-00478-MHM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 9, 2004.
Decided Aug. 13, 2004.
Charles McManus, Florence, AZ, pro se.
John L. Saccoman, Office of the Arizona Attorney General, Phoenix, AZ, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, RAWLINSON and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Charles McManus appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
The district court resolved the case on timeliness grounds. However, as the district court correctly noted, it is bound by the state court's factual findings regarding petitioner's claims that his due process rights were violated because of false testimony and witness tampering. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1). Accordingly, we conclude that petitioner's due process claims fail.
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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.