Calvin Rogers v. Kathleen Dickinson

MEMORANDUM

Calvin P. Rogers appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for robbery. Rogers contends that insufficient evidence supported his identity as the perpetrator in one of the two charged robberies (“the Milpitas robbery”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s denial of a state prisoner’s petition for habeas corpus. Brown v. Horell, 644 F.3d 969, 978 (9th Cir.2011). Because Rogers filed his petition after April 24, 1996, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) governs his action. Id. We review the last reasoned state court decision, here the California Court of Appeal’s decision. Id.

Rogers argues that eyewitness testimony suggesting he was not the Milpitas robber was so “extremely important and rare” that it “should establish a reasonable doubt for any rational fact finder.” He further contends that the evidence of other robberies, which the State used to establish Rogers’s identity as the Milpitas robber, was not sufficiently probative to offset that eyewitness testimony. The similarities between the robberies, he…