Stephen Greel v. Michael Martel

MEMORANDUM

Stephen Greel appeals an order from the district court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He argues that the trial court improperly admitted propensity and other prejudicial evidence and that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of kidnapping to commit rape, both alleged errors in violation of his due process rights. A court reviewing a habeas petition considers the last reasoned opinion of the state court, in this case that of the California Court of Appeal. See Womack v. Del Papa, 497 F.3d 998, 1002 (9th Cir.2007). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. The facts of this case are known to the parties. We need not repeat them here.

This court reviews de novo a district court’s denial of a writ of habeas corpus and may affirm the judgment on any ground supported in the record. Martinez-Villareal v. Lewis, 80 F.3d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir.1996). Because Greel filed his petition after April 24, 1996, the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) applies. See Greenway v. Schriro, 653 F.3d 790, 797 (9th Cir.2011). Under AEDPA, a reviewing court considers whether the state court’s adjudication of a claim was “contrary…