Tan

Tak Sun Tan v. Runnels

Good Law
413 F.3d 1101·2005 WL 1579655
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 6, 200504-55775, 04-55792 and 04-55815California4,273 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trott, J.

Wardens Runnels and Pliler appeal the district court’s decision to grant Jason Feng Chan’s, Tak Sun Tan’s, and Indra Lim’s (“petitioners”) petitions for habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . In ruling in favor of the petitioners, the district court — -purporting to apply the standard of review required by the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) — found fault with the California Court of Appeal’s decision to affirm the petitioners’ convictions and conclusion that the prosecutor did not engage in prejudicial misconduct in the petitioners’ joint trial by (1) arguing facts not in evidence, (2) presenting as true a fact that was false, and (3) appealing inappropriately to the jurors’ passions and prejudices. Respectfully, we disagree with the district court because we conclude without reservation that the state court’s determination that there was no prosecutorial misconduct was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts, and we reverse the court’s grant of the habeas petitions.

I

BACKGROUND

A.

Dr. Haing Ngor — a man well-known for the tragic experiences he endured in…

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.