Pratt

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Pratt appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We address each of his claims in turn.

Petitioner first contends that the district court erred in dismissing his claim that his murder conviction was based on a non-unanimous verdict. In Jeffries v. Blodgett, 1 we held that “a general unanimity instruction will normally suffice to instruct the jury that they must be unanimous as to the elements which form the basis of the *229 conviction,” unless “there is a genuine possibility of jury confusion or that conviction may result from different jurors concluding that the defendant committed different acts.” 2 In that case, the court held that “the special verdict form indicates that the jurors were unanimous as to these specifics of the crime.” 3 This was, likewise, a case in which a special verdict form was given, and it is not a case where the jurors were likely confused.

Pratt next argues that the district court erred in dismissing Pratt’s claim that the bailiffs unconstitutional communications tainted the jury. The evidence regarding possible communications by the bailiff is very troubling, but the standard of review bars us from…