Christina Sajor-Reeder v. J. Cavazos

MEMORANDUM

Christina Sajor-Reeder appeals the district court’s denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas relief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253(a). Because the last-reasoned decision of the state court, that of the California Court of Appeal for the Second District, was neither contrary, to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court precedent, we affirm. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1); Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 100-02 , 131 S.Ct. 770 , 178 L.Ed.2d 624 (2011).

1. The only certified issue is whether the state court reasonably determined that sufficient evidence of implied malice supported Sajor-Reeder’s second-degree murder conviction. Under California law, malice may be implied from committing “an act, the natural consequences of which are dangerous to life;” with knowing endangerment of others’ lives; and deliberate action with “conscious disregard for life.” People v. Nieto Benitez, 4 Cal.4th 91 , 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 864 , 840 P.2d 969, 975 (1992).

First, the California Court of Appeal reasonably concluded that a jury could have found that Sajor-Reeder committed an “act, the natural consequences of which are…