Sammy E. Carlyle v. James Rowland, Director, Attorney General of the State of California

967 F.2d 584 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Sammy E. CARLYLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James ROWLAND, Director, Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 91-55385. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 4, 1992. * Decided June 3, 1992. Before TANG, SCHROEDER and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Sammy E. Carlyle, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. We affirm. 3 Carlyle contends that his state court conviction violated his federal constitutional right to a unanimous jury verdict because the trial court replaced a juror after deliberations had commenced on the ground that the juror was refusing to follow the court's instruction on reasonable doubt. 4 A writ of habeas corpus is available under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (a) only on the basis of some transgression of federal law binding on the state courts. Middleton…