Castro

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Stephen C. Johnson appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner contends that the state court erred by rejecting his claim that his confession was involuntary. Reviewing the district court de novo, Doody v. Schriro, 596 F.3d 620, 634 (9th Cir.2010) (en banc), we affirm.

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , we

Doody, 596 F.3d at 634 (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, the California Court of Appeal found that Detective Carver’s statements to Petitioner during the interrogation constituted coercive conduct. “[C]oercive police activity is a necessary predicate to the finding that a confession is not ‘voluntary’ within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 167 , 107 S.Ct. 515 , 93 L.Ed.2d 473 (1986).

In addition, however, a confession must be “the result of’ the coercive conduct to be involuntary. Hutto v. Ross, 429 U.S. 28, 30 , 97 S.Ct. 202 , 50 L.Ed.2d 194 (1976) (per curiam) (internal quotation marks omitted). The state court found that Detective Carver’s statements were not the motivating…