Porter v. Terhune

Full title: Essex PORTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Cal TERHUNE, Director of California…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 15, 2007

235 F. App'x 551 (9th Cir. 2007)

Opinion

No. 06-55693.

Submitted August 8, 2007^_.

_ This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed August 15, 2007.

Linda L. Griffis, Esq., Federal Public Defender's Office, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Alana Cohen Butler, Esq., Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-00-05468-DOC.

Before: KOZINSKI and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and BAER,^__ Senior Judge.

__ The Honorable Harold Baer, Jr., Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ^___

___ This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The state court wasn't unreasonable in holding that Porter could be forced to wear a stun belt during his trial. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2). "[C]ompelling circumstances" justified the use of the stun belt, Duckett v. Godinez, 67 F.3d 734, 748 (9th Cir. 1995), and there was evidence supporting a finding that the stun belt didn't impair Porter's ability to effectively communicate with his lawyers.

AFFIRMED.