Jefflo

MEMORANDUM ***

Jimmy D. Jefflo appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus. He contends that his Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection was violated when the state trial court denied his request for a transcript of his first trial, which had ended in a mistrial. Because Jefflo’s federal habeas petition was filed after the effective date of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), he must establish that the state court ruling was “contrary to” or involved an “unreasonable application” of clearly established Supreme Court law in order to obtain habeas relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d); Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 405-07 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000). He has not met that burden.

In Britt v. North Carolina, 404 U.S. 226, 227-28 , 92 S.Ct. 431 , 30 L.Ed.2d 400 (1971), a case on which the California Court of Appeal relied, the Supreme Court held that the state, upon request, is constitutionally required to provide an indigent defendant with a free trial transcript of a prior mistrial, or an alternative device that would serve the same function as the transcript. The Ninth Circuit, interpreting Britt , has stated…