William Coates v. R. Grounds
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner William John Coates appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for continuous sexual abuse of a child under fourteen in violation of Cal.Penal Code § 288.5. Coates argues the admission of testimony about his prior acts rendered his trial fundamentally unfair and that without that testimony, the jury could not have found him guilty of committing three or more acts of substantial sexual conduct with a child under the age of fourteen, as required by § 288.5.
Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), we may grant a habeas petition only if the state court’s decision was “forbidden by ‘clearly established Federal law,’ as laid out by the Supreme Court.” Holley v. Yarborough, 568 F.3d 1091, 1101 (9th Cir.2009) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)). A legal principle is “clearly established” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1) if “it is embodied in a holding of [the Supreme] Court.” Thaler v. Haynes, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1171 , 1173, 175 L.Ed.2d 1003 (2010) (citing Carey v. Musladin, 549 U.S. 70, 74 , 127 S.Ct. 649 , 166 L.Ed.2d 482 (2006)).