Romero

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner Raymond Romero argues that the state trial court violated his due process right to be present at a “critical stage of trial” by adjudicating (and rejecting) without a hearing his post-sentencing request to strike a prior conviction under California’s Three Strikes Law, 1 pursuant *243 to the then-recent decision in People v. Superior Court (Romero), 13 Cal.4th 497 , 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 789 , 917 P.2d 628 (1996). That case recognized the discretion of a California sentencing court to strike a pri- or conviction under the Three Strikes Law. Petitioner’s counsel filed written arguments on his behalf, urging the court to use its discretion favorably, and the court considered the arguments, but without holding a hearing.

Our review is under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). It is clearly established that a defendant has a right to be present at any stage of the criminal proceeding that is critical to its outcome if his presence would contribute to the fairness or reliability of the procedure. Kentucky v. Stincer, 482 U.S. 730, 745 , 107 S.Ct. 2658 , 96 L.Ed.2d 631 (1987). The California courts did not apply Supreme Court precedent unreasonably, however, in holding that the…