Arthur M. Sambrano v. Robert Borg, Warden

995 F.2d 232 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Arthur M. SAMBRANO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert BORG, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 92-16823. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 12, 1993. * Decided May 26, 1993. Before: HUG, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Arthur M. Sambrano, a California prisoner, appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. He contends that the state trial court violated his constitutional right to confrontation by limiting his cross-examination. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, Payne v. Borg, 982 F.2d 335, 338 (9th Cir.1992), and affirm. 3 Habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is only available on the basis of a violation of federal law binding on the state courts and not for an alleged error in the interpretation or application of state law. Middleton v. Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir.1985), cert.…