Demarkas King v. Anthony Hedgpeth

Good Law
472 F. App'x 818
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 30, 201210-17846California253 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Demarkas S. King was convicted in California state court after a jury trial for murder and attempted murder. He appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in which he challenged the integrity of the jury verdict. We affirm.

The state trial court held a full evidentiary hearing on Juror No. 4’s multiple claims of juror misconduct, including her own belatedly perceived bias. The court found that she was not credible and that no juror misconduct had occurred. The state court described the juror’s efforts to undo the verdict as “buyer’s remorse.”

The parties dispute whether the state court’s adjudication should be reviewed under the standard set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(2) or (e)(1). Regardless of which provision applies, however, the decision of the state trial court remains a credibility determination that is entitled to substantial deference. See Maxwell v. Roe, 628 F.3d 486, 503 (9th Cir.2010), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 611 , 181 L.Ed.2d 785 (2012). That ruling was neither unreasonable nor clearly erroneous, because the record contained ample support for the court’s determination. Juror No. 4’s version of what…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.