Kelvin Felton v. John Marshall

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 10-56687 · 2011-12-22 · Unpublished

Kelvin FELTON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. John MARSHALL and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Respondents—Appellees

Area: other
Panel: Alfred T. Goodwin (author), William T. Wallace, Mary M. McKeown

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 22 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KELVIN FELTON, No. 10-56687 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 3:09-cv-00732-JM v. MEMORANDUM * JOHN MARSHALL and EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Jeffrey T. Miller, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 19, 2011 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Kevin Felton appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. Appellant. P. 34(a)(2). Felton contends that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for making a criminal threat. We conclude that the state court’s decision rejecting this claim was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979).

We construe Felton’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 22- 1(e); see also Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

2 10-56687