Kou Cha v. James Tilton

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Kou Cha appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2258 , and we affirm.

Cha contends that the trial court’s conclusion that he failed to make a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination violated Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). The only support Cha provided for his People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258 , 148 Cal.Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 (1978) motion was that the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to dismiss two Hispanic male potential jurors. In denying the motion, the trial court indicated that two Hispanic potential jurors remained in the jury box and a number of others were left on the panel. On that record, the trial court’s conclusion that Cha failed to make a prima facie case of purposeful racial discrimination was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of Batson v. Kentucky.

Cha also contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the gang sentencing enhancements he received under Cal. Pen.Code § 186.22(b)(1). The statute does not require that he knew that the gang members have…