Macias

California state prisoner Dolores R. Macias appeals pro se the district court’s denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging her conviction for felony child abuse and second degree murder. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2258 , we review de novo, Mendez v. Small, 298 F.3d 1154, 1157-58 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

Macias contends the prosecutor committed misconduct by asking her on cross-examination if she had learned to hit her children without causing bruising. We conclude that this single allegedly improper question did not violate Macias’ right to a fair trial. See Ortiz v. Stewart, 149 F.3d 923, 934-35 (9th Cir.1998).

Macias also contends that her trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by not objecting to the admission of improper character evidence. Because Macias cannot show a reasonable probability that an objection to the character evidence would have changed the result of her trial, the district court properly rejected this contention. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Finally, Macias’ contention that the cumulative effect of errors rendered her trial fundamentally unfair lacks…