Gregg Ebeling v. Greg Smith

MEMORANDUM

Gregg Ebeling appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (a). The Nevada Supreme Court’s denial of Ebeling’s claim that his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the trial court’s limitations on the cross-examination of the child witnesses, and by the exclusion of expert testimony regarding the child witnesses, was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent. Cf. Taylor v. Illinois, 484 U.S. 400, 411 , 108 S.Ct. 646 , 98 L.Ed.2d 798 (1988); Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284, 302-08 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973). The trial court did not prohibit Ebeling “from engaging in otherwise appropriate cross-examination,” see Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 679-80 , 106 S.Ct. 1431 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674 (1986), and there is no Supreme Court case addressing the exclusion of expert testimony, Moses v. Payne, 555 F.3d 742, 757-59 (9th Cir.2008). Although Ebeling failed to exhaust his due process claim based on prosecutorial misconduct, we deny it on the merits, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (b)(2), because the prosecutor’s comments did not make the trial…