Kinzie Noordman v. James Tilton

Good Law
585 F. App'x 545
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 22, 201412-56194California434 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Kinzie Noordman, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of her petition for habeas corpus. Her appeal challenges her conviction on one count of first degree murder with a sentencing enhancement for use of a firearm “in the commission” of the murder. We affirm.

1. We give deference under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d), to the California state court’s factual conclusion that Noord-man waived (both personally and by counsel) her right to be present for the trial judge’s answer of the jury’s questions. The record reflects Noordman’s waiver, and the trial judge said on the record that he had consulted the attorneys about the answer he was about to give, and that both attorneys had agreed he could give that answer, which is sufficient basis for the state court’s determination that consultation occurred.

2. The trial court did not direct a verdict against Noordman by telling the jury that it need not worry about “the law pertaining to shooting a dead body.” The California Superior Court that denied Noordman’s habeas petition was not unreasonable in determining that the jury was asking only about the law,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.