Michael Scott v. M. Krammer

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Michael Scott appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. We review the district court’s denial of a habeas petition de novo. Lopez v. Schriro, 491 F.3d 1029, 1036 (9th Cir.2007) (citing Barker v. Fleming, 423 F.3d 1085, 1091 (9th Cir.2005), cert. denied sub nom., Barker v. Spalding, 547 U.S. 1138 , 126 S.Ct. 2041 , 164 L.Ed.2d 796 (2006)). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2253, and we affirm.

Scott contends that his conviction is unconstitutional because the prosecutor’s use of peremptory challenges to strike African-Ameriean venirepersons violated his right to equal protection as well as the equal protection rights of the dismissed potential jurors. See Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400, 415 , 111 S.Ct. 1364 , 113 L.Ed.2d 411 (1991); Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). Because Scott’s claim was adjudicated on the merits by the state court, our review is limited by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”). See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). Scott contends that in determining that the prosecutor did not violate Batson or the equal protection rights of the…