Adams

*2 MEMORANDUM *

Darrell Adams, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. Adams’s petition challenges his convictions for attempted murder, use of a firearm, felon in possession of a firearm, and enhancements. Adams contends that the district court erred by denying his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, instructional error, and prosecutorial misconduct, and by failing to grant an evidentiary hearing on his ineffectiveness claim for failure to investigate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm.

I.

The district court did not err in failing to conduct an evidentiary hearing on Adams’s claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Before AEDPA, “[a] habeas petitioner [was] entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a claim if ‘(1) the petitioner’s allegations, if proved, would entitle him to relief, and (2) the state court trier of fact [had] not, after a full and fair hearing, reliably found the relevant facts.” ’ Hendricks v. Vasquez, 974 F.2d 1099, 1103 (9th Cir.1992) (citation omitted); accord Jones v. Wood, 114 F.3d 1002, 1010 (9th Cir. 1997). Because we conclude that…