Gilchrist v. Lamarque

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 07 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT WILLIAM GILCHRIST, No. 08-15314 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-04-00920-FCD v. MEMORANDUM * A. A. LAMARQUE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Frank C. Damrell, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 15, 2009 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner William Gilchrist appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). SR/Research Gilchrist contends that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the admission of certain evidence. The record reflects that Gilchrist has failed to show prejudice from the allegedly deficient performance or that the state court’s rejection of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim was an unreasonable application of clearly established United States Supreme Court precedent. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). AFFIRMED. SR/Research 2 08-15314