Xiong Yang v. Jeanne Woodford

MEMORANDUM

Xiong Nick Yang appeals from the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus arising out of his convictions in California state court. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of the case, we need not recite it here.

The California state court decision denying relief was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the United States Supreme Court. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d).

In this case, co-defendants entered into plea agreements, but sentencing was deferred until after Yang’s trial. Yang contends that the plea agreements were structured to prevent his co-defendants from testifying and, if they had testified, they would have identified a different person as the actual shooter in the incident. The state court’s conclusion that the plea structuring was not misconduct that “infected the entire trial” was not objectively unreasonable. After carefully considering the evidence and the record, we conclude that the state court’s determination was not “so lacking in justification that [it] was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded…