Aron Jonz v. Sherman Hatcher; the Attorney General of the State of Nevada

* 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. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ARON JONZ,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SHERMAN HATCHER; THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE
OF NEVADA,
Respondents - Appellees.
No. 08-15272
D.C. No. 2:05-cv-01501-PMP-
GWF
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Philip M. Pro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 28, 2010 **
Before: FARRIS, HALL, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Aron Jonz appeals from the district court’s judgment
denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm.
FILED
MAR 31 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Jonz contends that his counsel’s failure to fully explain to him the elements
of the charged offense and to provide him with copies of discovery and the pre-
sentence report rendered his Alford plea involuntary. North Carolina v. Alford,
400 U.S. 25 (1970). We affirm the district court because Jonz has not
demonstrated that the Nevada state courts’ denial of relief was contrary to, or an
unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the
United States Supreme Court, or based on an unreasonable determination of the
facts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985);
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686-87, 691-93 (1984).
To the extent Jonz raises an uncertified issue in his briefs, we construe his
arguments as a motion to expand the certificate of appealability and we deny the
motion. See 9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th
Cir. 1999) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --