McDonald

McDonald v. Castro

Good Law
92 F. App'x 447
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 20, 2004No. 02-57121. D.C. No. CV-01-04581-AHMCalifornia1,457 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Michael J. McDonald appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenging his jury trial conviction for second degree murder, com *449 mitted when McDonald was sixteen. 1 The state court sentenced him to a term of fifteen years to life. We affirm.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review a denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus de novo. Collins v. Rice, 348 F.3d 1082, 1088 (9th Cir.2003). The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) applies to this petition, since McDonald filed his petition after April 24, 1996. We may not grant McDonald’s habeas relief from his state court conviction unless the state court proceedings were “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” or the state court’s conclusions were “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). McDonald therefore must prove that the state court’s decision was “ ‘objectively unreasonable’…

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.