United States Ninth Circuit

A habeas petition will be treated as a re-filing of an earlier claim rather than a "second or successive" petition under 28 U.S.C. section 2244(b), and a state court's application of the law as to exigent search circumstances in an ineffective assistance claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/13/2003
• Decided 03/25/2003
• Published 03/25/2003

Judges

• Before SILVERMAN, GOULD, Circuit Judges, and SEDWICK, District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Malcolm A. Heinicke,Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, San Francisco, CA, for the petitioner-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Sharon G. Birenbaum, Deputy Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for the respondent-appellee.