Constantino Carrera v. Robert Ayers, Jr.

Good Law
452 F. App'x 741
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 5, 201108-99007California1,071 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Constantino Carrera appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Carrera alleges multiple trial errors that entitle him to habeas relief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2253 and affirm on the issues addressed herein.

This court reviews de novo a district court’s decision to deny a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and reviews for clear error a district court’s findings of fact. Robinson v. Schriro, 595 F.3d 1086, 1099 (9th Cir.2010). This court cannot grant habeas relief unless a trial error “had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 623 , 113 S.Ct. 1710 , 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993). Under this standard, habeas relief cannot be granted unless there is “a reasonable probability” that the jury would have reached a different verdict absent the constitutional error. Clark v. Brown, 450 F.3d 898, 916 (9th Cir.2006).

I. Inconsistent Testimony

Carrera was not prejudiced by any inconsistencies between Miguel Santana’s testimony at Ramiro Ruiz’s trial and Santana’s testimony at Carrera’s subsequent trial. Thus, Carrera cannot parlay these…

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.