Case Name: Johnathan WISE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Carol PORTER, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-02-11
Citations: 120 F. App'x 737
Docket Number: No. 03-35502; D.C. No. CV-01-01136-RSL
Parties: Johnathan WISE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Carol PORTER, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before O’SCANNLAIN, McKEOWN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 120
Pages: 737–737

Head Matter:
Johnathan WISE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Carol PORTER, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 03-35502.
D.C. No. CV-01-01136-RSL.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Feb. 8, 2005.
Decided Feb. 11, 2005.
Jeff Ellis, Law Offices of Ellis, Holmes & Witchley, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
John Joseph Samson, Alex A. Kostin, AGWA — Office of the Washington Attorney General (Olympia) Criminal Justice Division, Olympia, WA, for RespondentAppellee.
Before O’SCANNLAIN, McKEOWN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Wise has abandoned his ineffective assistance of counsel claim predicated on the diminished capacity defense. He now pursues his claim with respect to "bolstering" of his self-defense argument. The Supreme Court of Washington's determination that Wise did not meet his burden to sustain his ineffective assistance of counsel claim vis-a-vis failure to introduce mental eapacity/psychiatric evidence was not contrary to and did not involve an unreasonable application of established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). Evidence proffered during the district court's evidentiary healing process was not sufficient to change this result.
The district court's denial of petitioner's § 2254 petition is 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.