Edward Novelo v. James Yates

MEMORANDUM

Warden James A. Yates appeals the district court’s order (1) granting habeas relief on Edward A. Novelo’s juror misconduct claim based on the state court’s unreasonable determination of the facts; and (2) requiring the state trial court to provide Novelo with a constitutionally adequate hearing to address his allegation of juror bias. The district court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion that due process considerations mandated a constitutionally adequate hearing on the claimed misconduct. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review the district court’s decision to grant or deny a habeas petition de novo. Bribiesca v. Galaza, 215 F.3d 1015, 1018 (9th Cir.2000). Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), federal habeas corpus relief is available if the state court’s decision was “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(2). Because the California Supreme Court denied Novelo’s petition for review in an unexplained order, we evaluate the decision of the California Court of Appeal, which is the last reasoned…