Filed: Nov. 05, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-40207 Conference Calendar _ JAMES WOODALL, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-95-CV-275 - - - - - - - - - - October 23, 1996 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* James
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 96-40207 Conference Calendar _ JAMES WOODALL, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-95-CV-275 - - - - - - - - - - October 23, 1996 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* James W..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 96-40207
Conference Calendar
__________________
JAMES WOODALL,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
Respondent-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-95-CV-275
- - - - - - - - - -
October 23, 1996
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
James Woodall, #443580, appeals from the district court's
denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254. Woodall argues that trial counsel was ineffective
for 1) failing to object to the ethnic composition of the jury
panel, 2) failing to investigate the case adequately, and
3) failing to object at trial when the prosecutor questioned
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 96-40207
-2-
state witnesses concerning Woodall’s state of mind. We have
reviewed the record and briefs and find no reversible error.
Counsel’s performance was not ineffective. See Strickland v.
Washington,
466 U.S. 668, 689-94 (1984).
AFFIRMED.