Ronald Keith Pike, Petitioner-appellant, v. Don R. Hill, Warden, Respondent-appellee, 127 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 1997)

MEMORANDUM^* 

Ronald Keith Pike, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We review de novo a district court's decision on a section 2254 petition. See Duckett v. Godinez, 67 F.3d 734, 739 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 1549 (1996). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

We agree with the district court that Pike failed to show California's standard for withdrawal of a guilty plea violates due process. See Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197, 201-202 (1977); see also Medina v. California, 505 U.S. 437, 446 (1992); Langford v. Day, 110 F.3d 1380, 1389 (1996), cert. denied, 1997 WL 403873 (1997). We also agree with the district court that Pike failed to show he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel based on an alleged conflict of interest. Pike's allegations did not demonstrate the existence of an "actual conflict of interest." See Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 348 (1980); see also United States v. Bonin, 59 F.3d 815, 827 (9th Cir. 1995) (mere "theoretical" or "potential" conflict is insufficient; to constitute an actual conflict, counsel must have actively represented conflicting interests), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 718 (1996).

AFFIRMED.