Julio Morales v. Charles Ryan ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 23 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JULIO CESAR MORALES, No. 15-17388
Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:14-cv-01729-DJH
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CHARLES L. RYAN and ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
ARIZONA,
Respondents-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Diane J. Humetewa, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 18, 2017**
Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Arizona state prisoner Julio Cesar Morales appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review a district court’s denial of a
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
habeas corpus petition de novo, see Stanley v. Cullen, 633 F.3d 852, 859 (9th Cir.
2011), and we affirm.
Morales contends that his second trial counsel rendered ineffective
assistance by promising, but failing to obtain, a more favorable plea offer. The
Arizona Court of Appeals’ rejection of this claim was not contrary to, or an
unreasonable application of, Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), nor an
unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in state
court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 100-103
(2011).
We treat Morales’s additional argument as a motion to expand the certificate
of appealability and deny the motion. See 9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); Hiivala v. Wood,
195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999).
AFFIRMED.
2 15-17388