Steven Jaffe v. Matthew Kramer

MEMORANDUM

Steven Jaffe appeals the district court’s order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We affirm.

This court reviews de novo a district court’s denial of habeas relief. Castellanos v. Small, 766 F.3d 1137, 1145 (9th Cir. 2014). A petitioner can obtain habeas relief if the state court adjudication “involved an unreasonable application of[] clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). But even if a state court made a constitutional error within the meaning of this provision, the federal court must also assess whether the error was prejudicial. Ortiz v. Yates, 704 F.3d 1026, 1038 (9th Cir. 2012).

Here, Jaffe argues that evidence was admitted at his trial unconstitutionally via a transcript of Officer David Miller’s testimony during a preliminary hearing. Miller was not available to testify at trial, and Jaffe argues he was unable to cross-examine Miller effectively. See Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 59 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004) (holding that an absent witness’s statements are admissible under the Confrontation Clause “only where the declarant is unavailable, and only…