In re Soderstrom
For the fifth time, petitions us for a writ, contending the two attorneys we appointed to represent him for purposes of his appeal and the consolidated first petition for writ of habeas corpus rendered ineffective assistance to him in those proceedings. He also requests we take judicial notice of our files in cases G036476 and G034723, which we grant. In this petition, he makes a myriad of contentions, essentially attacking one attorneys failure to argue certain issues on appeal and then attacking habeas counsels actions in the writ proceeding. As most of the issues were already held by us to be lacking in merit in our prior opinion in the consolidated cases numbered G034723 and G036476, and Soderstroms ad hominem attacks on counsel are irremediable via habeas petition, Court summarily deny his petition without further evidentiary hearing.
Comments on In re Soderstrom