Rodney C. Dyson, Petitioner-appellant, v. Eddie Ylst, Warden, Respondent-appellee, 113 F.3d 1240 (9th Cir. 1997)
Annotate this CaseBefore: FLETCHER, REINHARDT, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Rodney C. Dyson, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his second degree murder conviction. Dyson asserts that the district court erred when it denied his claims that the jury was improperly instructed and that counsel was ineffective when he failed to object to the instructions. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and review de novo. See Martinez-Villareal v. Lewis, 80 F.3d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 588 (1996).
We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its order filed on February 27, 1996.1
AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Dyson's contention that the district court should have held an evidentiary hearing on his claims is waived because it is raised for the first time in his reply brief, see Gray v. Lewis, 881 F.2d 821, 823 n. 3 (9th Cir. 1989), and in any case lacks merit, see Greyson v. Kellam, 937 F.2d 1409, 1415 (9th Cir. 1991)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
