Zimmerman

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Adam J. Zimmerman appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his convictions for possession of forged driver’s licenses in violation of CaLPenal Code § 470b, unlawful use of a license, and unlawful alteration of a license, in violation of Cal. Veh.Code § 14610. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, see Patterson v. Gomez, 223 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir.2000), cert. denied sub nom., Terhune v. Patterson, 531 U.S. 1104 , 121 S.Ct. 844 , 148 L.Ed.2d 723 (2001), and we affirm.

Many of Zimmerman’s claims arise from his contention that a juror’s letter and an investigatory report revealed jury misconduct that violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. We disagree. Zimmerman has failed to show that the jury was exposed to improper external prejudicial information. See United States v. Old Chief, 121 F.3d 448, 451 (9th Cir.1997) (holding that whether a trial court should hold an evidentiary hearing on jury misconduct is guided by the jury’s exposure to improper external influence); Fed.R.Evid. 606(b) (prohibiting a juror from…