Joe Armstead v. Dwight Neven

MEMORANDUM

Joe Kelly Armstead, a Nevada state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review a district court’s denial of a habeas petition de novo and its factual findings for clear error. Stanley v. Cullen, 633 F.3d 852, 859 (9th Cir.2011).

Federal habeas relief is warranted only if the state court’s decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court,” or “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1) — (2). The standard of review is “highly deferential ... [and] demands that state-court decisions be given the benefit of the doubt.” Cullen v. Pinholster, - U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 1388, 1398 , 179 L.Ed.2d 557 (2011) (quoting Woodford v. Visciotti, 537 U.S. 19, 24 , 123 S.Ct. 357 , 154 L.Ed.2d 279 (2002) (per curiam)).

Armstead first argues that he was denied his due process right to a fair trial because of alleged prosecutorial misconduct, which he maintains portrayed him as a drug dealer…