Isabel Varela v. Debra Johnson

Good Law
667 F. App'x 664
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 28, 201614-15885California566 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Isabel Varela appeals the district court’s decision to deny her habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review the district court’s decision de novo. See Lopez v. Thompson, 202 F.3d 1110, 1116 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). We review the district court’s factual findings for clear error. See id.

“Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), federal habeas relief is only available if the state court decision (1) was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the United States Supreme Court; or (2) was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceeding.” Garcia v. Long, 808 F.3d 771, 776 (9th Cir. 2015) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), (2)). The state court’s ruling must be “so lacking in justification that there was an error well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.” Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 103 , 131 S.Ct. 770 , 178 L.Ed.2d 624 (2011). In applying these standards, we review the last reasoned…

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.