Marcus Blair, Jr. v. L. Chrones

MEMORANDUM

Marcus Quinn Blair, Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his jury conviction for murder. Blair seeks relief alleging (1) two claims of juror misconduct depriving him of the right to a fair trial — (A) Juror No. 2’s use of a legal dictionary to define “reasonable” and “heat of passion” to other jurors and (B) jurors’ sharing of their “expertise” on ballistics with other jurors— and (2) trial court error in answering a jury question violating his due process rights. We review de novo the district court’s denial of a state prisoner’s habeas petition, Parle v. Runnels, 505 F.3d 922, 926 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.

When considering prejudice due to juror misconduct or an erroneous jury instruction, we must determine “whether the ... error had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 623 , 113 S.Ct. 1710 , 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Supreme Court explained “that we need not conduct an analysis under AEDPA of whether the state court’s harmlessness determination on direct review ... was contrary to or…