Marcus Borges v. Dave Davey

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Marcus Borges appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus, in which he challenges his conviction for second-degree robbery on the grounds that three adverse rulings by the trial court violated his constitutional rights: first, the trial court’s sua sponte ruling limiting defense counsel’s cross-examination of the victim during trial; second, the trial court’s admission of testimony by the investigating officer that, in his opinion, the victim was robbed and Borges was the robber; and third, the trial court’s denial of Borges’s motion for a new trial, through which he sought to introduce a new percipient witness who could purportedly testify to Borges’s innocence. The district court denied Borges habeas relief on all three claims of constitutional error. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. Applying the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), we hold that the California Court of Appeal’s determination that Borges’s Sixth Amendment right to cross-examine witnesses was not violated by the trial court’s limitation on defense counsel’s questioning of the victim was…