Chea

*133 MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Buntheoun Chea appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his 1998 jury conviction of murder and conspiracy to commit first degree robbery. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1381 ; this court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2253. We affirm.

A member of the jury which convicted Chea received extrinsic information about him from the juror’s son, who was incarcerated at the same facility with Chea and his codefendants. Chea asserted in post trial motions that this information—that Chea knew how to kickbox, had tattoos and was a “bad dude”—was disseminated to fellow jurors, in violation of Chea’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The state trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing, made findings of fact, and concluded that, while the one juror did receive extrinsic evidence from her son and two other jurors were aware of it, the rest of the jury panel, including the one holdout juror who eventually changed her mind and voted to convict, did not have access to the extrinsic evidence. The California Court of Appeal found that no prejudice…