United States District Court, D. Arizona
LESLIE A. BOWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the court is a petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, filed on July 26, 2012, by Richard Joe Gonzalez, an inmate confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex in Florence, Arizona. (Doc. 1)
Magistrate Judge Bowman presides over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Docs. 11, 13)
The petition will be denied. Trial counsel was not ineffective, and Gonzalez's remaining claims do not raise issues of federal constitutional law.
Summary of the Case
Gonzalez was found guilty after a jury trial of one count of continuous sexual abuse of a child. (Doc. 10-1, p. 2) On June 30, 2008, the trial court sentenced Gonzalez to 20 years' imprisonment followed by community supervision. (Doc. 10-1, p. 6)
On direct appeal, Gonzalez argued (1) the trial court erred in permitting the testimony of expert Wendy Dutton, (2) the trial court erred by not limiting the scope of Dutton's testimony, (3) the trial court erred in denying the defense an interview of the victim's representative, (4) the prosecutor violated Gonzalez's right to remain silent during the questioning of detective Flores, and (5) the prosecutor improperly impeached Gonzalez with a prior drug conviction. (Doc. 10-1, p. 12) The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence on October 20, 2009. (Doc. 10-2, p. 15) The Arizona Supreme Court denied review on April 7, 2010. (Doc. 10-2, p. 43)
On June 2, 2010, Gonzalez filed notice of post-conviction relief. (Doc. 10-2, p. 45) In his petition he argued trial counsel was ineffective for failing to contest evidence of Gonzalez's prior convictions for drug trafficking. (Doc. 10-3, pp. 7-15) The trial court denied the petition on April 12, 2011. (Doc. 10-3, p. 33) On July 29, 2011, the Arizona Court of Appeals granted review but denied relief adopting the reasoning of the trial court below. (Doc. 10-3, pp. 50-52)
On July 26, 2012, Gonzalez filed the pending petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 1) He raises four grounds for relief:
(1) Trial counsel was ineffective for failing to contest evidence regarding Gonzalez's prior conviction for drug trafficking.
(2) The trial court erred by denying the defense the opportunity to interview the victim's representative.
(3) The trial court erred by allowing the testimony of Wendy Dutton.
(4) The trial court erred by not limiting the scope of ...