Parks

Parks v. Carey

Good Law
100 F. App'x 611
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 2004No. 03-55366California779 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

We affirm the district court’s denial of Kenneth Kim Parks’s (Parks) federal habeas petition. As the parties are familiar with the facts, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

Because Parks filed his federal habeas petition after April 24, 1996, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) applies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ; Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 326-27 , 117 S.Ct. 2059 , 138 L.Ed.2d 481 (1997). AEDPA dictates that we review de novo the district court’s denial of Parks’s habeas petition, see Avila v. Galaza, 297 F.3d 911 , 914 n. 1 (9th Cir.2002), cert. dismissed, 538 U.S. 919 , 123 S.Ct. 1571 , 155 L.Ed.2d 308 (2003), but we must uphold the district court’s factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous. Solis v. Garcia, 219 F.3d 922, 926 (9th Cir.2000).

Under AEDPA, a federal court may grant a writ of habeas corpus only if the challenged state court ruling “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” or “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence…

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.