Jesus Valencia v. Anthony Hedgpeth
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Jesus Valencia appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Valencia was convicted of two counts of continuous sexual abuse and two counts of forcible lewd conduct for the sexual molestation of his three younger sisters. He contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to object to the admission of his confession, which he claims was coerced, and to the admission of certain “red stain” evidence that the prosecution employed to allege during its closing that Valencia had raped his 14-year old sister. Because the California Court of Appeal denied Valencia’s claims on the merits, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 precludes federal habeas relief unless its decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). Valencia does not contend that the state court’s decision was “contrary to” clearly established law, only that it was an “unreasonable application” of Supreme Court precedent.