Duncan

MEMORANDUM ***

In this appeal from the district court’s denial of a petition for habeas corpus, Craig Ladale Smith argues that the Cali *558 fornia courts violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment by sentencing him under California’s “three strikes” law to a term of 25 years to life for petty theft. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Given Smith’s extensive criminal record, we cannot say that his sentence violated his clearly established Eighth Amendment rights, as determined by the United States Supreme Court. Accordingly, we AEFRIM.

DISCUSSION

Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we repeat them only as necessary to explain our decision.

A. Standard of Review

We review de novo a district court’s decision to grant or deny a state prisoner’s petition for habeas relief. See Bribiesca v. Galaza, 215 F.3d 1015, 1018 (9th Cir.2000). Because Smith filed his habeas petition in 1998, he is subject to the provisions of The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), and in particular to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), which mandates substantial deference to the decisions of state courts.…