Richard Lara v. Kathleen Allison

MEMORANDUM

Richard Lara appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Lara was convicted of first degree murder, attempted murder, and conspiracy to commit murder stemming from an altercation in the parking lot of a market in 2004. At trial, the court admitted statements made by Jessie Heredia, Lara’s co-defendant and an employee at the market, to Carlos Chavez, Heredia’s coworker. Lara’s petition contends that these statements were testimonial and that their admission violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Lara argues that the California Court of Appeal’s determination that Heredia’s hearsay statements were nontestimonial was contrary to the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), and Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 , 126 S.Ct. 2266 , 165 L.Ed.2d 224 (2006). We disagree.

The Supreme Court has never found a statement made outside of a law enforcement context to be testimonial. See Davis, 547 U.S. at 823 n. 2, 126 S.Ct. 2266 (finding it “unnecessary to consider…