Carrafa

MEMORANDUM

Joan Larae Carrafa (“Carrafa”) was convicted in a jury trial in California state court of Armed Robbery and of First Degree Murder with Special Circumstances. Carrafa appeals the denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition that claimed that counsel in her appeal to the California Court of Appeal was ineffective in failing to argue that the state trial court had improperly admitted prejudicial and inflammatory evidence and had improperly denied her motions to substitute counsel. We have jurisdiction over Carrafa’s appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. Lockhart v. Terhune, 250 F.3d 1223, 1226 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

The facts and proceedings in the district court are familiar to the parties and recited here only as necessary. We review de novo a district court’s denial of a § 2254 petition. Bailey v. Newland, 263 F.3d 1022, 1028 (9th Cir.2001), cert, denied, — U.S.-, 122 S.Ct. 1556 , 152 L.Ed.2d 479 (2002).

Carrafa’s claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel are reviewed under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-89 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). See Bailey, 263 F.3d at 1028 . Carrafa must show that: 1) her appellate counsel’s…