Whether the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was proper after appellate review

PRESENTED ArhcleCELb sWnj 4 c«u3^i»n flukes a -ftrJmj of W, ^rVs^io-xl e'«">“+ ■ ff e-rimts, •ln orjer -fee +u fej^l enm« +° u o-FfensW U™M 5^ rfn 4U pWn-W ^Tnj |$ u.s. c, 3 5^' ”< shelter, ca4tl'+. oM-Htfn-hi of■28U&l.§'i.2£3 ]mo& s^^ c^.pAo5>+e of +° Cc»Tfl»,+* f^.u‘7 J. xu< appe® 1'^ app^I 4-V\e <2eAU*l v,\\k/ -to ± ✓> bu4 20 U3A§ _±erAo+io^-) ow .^^tltr^ a eenh^cA^_ ooc;^ mo'hon, 41V oltfAK. -2S .W^^^ond) TVid ^lcrt< WS®aP+U^ poSe , review vod& ^-g .'.KtJrWhC/eaW S^ix.^ cw^orii^ iXkJer VI • fecei0< review of +fe4c 4W 4K.4 f.lev denial of HiJ ^'cc-^z «(» °^ under C^ ^^2i,fc>^ 7ZW c-cinniAA'i 6AS^z V J