Seawright

Seawright v. Terhune

Good Law
42 F. App'x 945
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 2, 2002No. 99-56907; D.C. No. CV-98-09328-CBMCalifornia471 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

California state prisoner Michael Wayne Seawright appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his conviction for his part in the 1983 first degree murder of Catherine Shoup, his mother-in-law. Seawright’s petition alleged he was not allowed to present defense evidence that the crime was committed by Catherine’s husband. We affirm the district court’s denial of Seawright’s petition.

A district court’s decision to deny a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition is reviewed de novo. Alvarado v. Hill, 252 F.3d 1066, 1068 (9th Cir.2001). Appellant’s habeas petition was filed after the enactment of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”). Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996). Therefore, we apply the AEDPA in reviewing *946 Appellant’s petition. Fuller v. Roe, 182 F.3d 699, 702 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam). Under AEDPA, a petitioner must demonstrate that the state court’s adjudication of the merits “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” See Penry v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.