The following excerpt is from Smith v. Kernan, 139 F.3d 908 (9th Cir. 1998):
The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 2254. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1291 and 2253. We review the district court's decision de novo, Sanders v. Ratelle, 21 F.3d 1446, 1451 (9th Cir.1994), and we affirm. 1
Smith argues that his trial counsel was ineffective because his attorney (1) failed to move for a mistrial pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); (2) failed to move for a continuance; (3) failed to request an evidentiary hearing; (4) failed to contact the attorney who represented Smith at the police lineup; and (5) failed to call Officer Reyna to the witness stand.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.