Danny Kim v. W. L. Montgomery

MEMORANDUM

Daniel Kim appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition, in which he claimed his right to a fair trial by an impartial jury was violated because a juror intentionally concealed during voir dire her son’s conviction for a gang-related crime. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo a district court’s denial of a habeas petition, Stanley v. Cullen, 633 F.3d 852, 859 (9th Cir.2011), and we affirm.

The district court did not err in rejecting Kim’s actual bias claim. The “remedy for allegations of juror partiality is a hearing where the defendant has the opportunity to prove actual bias.” Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 215 , 102 S.Ct. 940 , 71 L.Ed.2d 78 (1982); see Fields v. Brown, 503 F.3d 755, 773 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). The trial court conducted such a hearing, and the state court’s reliance on it was reasonable. See § 2254(d)(1). Moreover, the state court’s decision was not an unreasonable determination of the facts. See § 2254(d)(2). The decision was based on the general lack of similarity between Kim’s case and Juror l’s son’s case, other than the gang connection, and Kim’s failure to…