Casillas

MEMORANDUM *

George Casillas appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus. We affirm the judgement of the district court.

Because Casillas’s petition was filed after April 24, 1996, the amendments to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act apply. Alcala v. Woodford, 334 F.3d 862, 868 (9th Cir.2003).

*552 The due process clause of the fourteenth amendment requires the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt every element of a charged offense. In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364 , 90 S.Ct. 1068 , 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970); Carella v. California, 491 U.S. 263, 265 , 109 S.Ct. 2419 , 105 L.Ed.2d 218 (1989). The constitution does not require specific words to be used in jury instructions, but does require the instructions as a whole to correctly convey the concept of reasonable doubt to the jury. Victor v. Nebraska, 511 U.S. 1, 5 , 114 S.Ct. 1239 , 127 L.Ed.2d 583 (1994). “The constitutional question is whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury understood the instructions to allow conviction based on proof insufficient to meet the Winship standard.” Id. at 6.

The jury instructions in this case were misleading.…