Darryl Wesley Funderburk, Petitioner-appellant, v. W.a. Duncan, Warden, Respondent-appellee, 70 F.3d 119 (9th Cir. 1995)

MEMORANDUM^** 

California prisoner Darryl Wesley Funderburk appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Funderburk contends that his state conviction for attempted robbery does not qualify as a serious felony, and thus sentence enhancements under state law were improper. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 2253. We review de novo, Calderon v. Prunty, 59 F.3d 1005, 1008 (9th Cir. 1995), and affirm.

Funderburk's argument is based on alleged errors of state law. Because he fails to demonstrate how his detention violates the Constitution or laws of the United States, the district court properly dismissed his petition. See Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 68 (1991); see also Bueno v. Hallahan, 988 F.2d 86, 88 (9th Cir. 1993) (federal courts defer to state courts' interpretation of their own laws).

AFFIRMED.