Sherman v. Roe

Full title: Darren Eugene SHERMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ernest C. ROE, Warden…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 16, 2002

41 F. App'x 914 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

41 Fed.Appx. 914 (9th Cir. 2002) Darren Eugene SHERMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ernest C. ROE, Warden; California Attorney General; Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees. No. 00-55975. D.C. No. CV-98-00172-AHS. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. July 16, 2002

Submitted July 11, 2002. ^*

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Alicemarie H. Stotler, District Judge, Presiding.

Before KOZINSKI and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges, and MAHAN, District Judge. ^**

** The Honorable James C. Mahan, United States District Judge for the District of Nevada, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ^***

*** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

We affirm the denial of Sherman's habeas petition for reasons stated in Magistrate Judge Zarefsky's Report and Recommendation and adopted by the district court.

AFFIRMED.