Salvador Renteria v. Derral Adams ( 2013 )

FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 04 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
SALVADOR M. RENTERIA, No. 11-15367
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:08-cv-05325-CRB
Northern District of California,
v. San Francisco
DERRAL G. ADAMS, Warden,
ORDER
Respondent - Appellee.
Before: GOODWIN, O’SCANNLAIN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The memorandum disposition filed April 18, 2013, is amended as follows:
As a substitute to the text at Page 3, Lines 5-12, starting with and ending , please insert the following:
398 U.S. 323, 331
(1970), that Petitioner failed to show that the trial court was “swayed by the array
of charges and tempted to reach a compromise verdict.” It attributed this, in part,
to the fact that “a seasoned trial judge” rather than a jury had been the finder of
fact. This conclusion was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of,
federal law as determined by the Supreme Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).>
With this amendment, the panel has voted unanimously to deny the petition
for panel rehearing. Judges O’Scannlain and N.R. Smith have voted to deny the
petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Goodwin so recommends.
The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no
active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.
App. P. 35.
The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are
DENIED.
No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc may be filed in
response to the amended disposition.