Pennington

MEMORANDUM *

State prisoner Gary Pennington appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his convictions for robbery, false imprisonment, assault with a firearm, and being a probationer in possession of a firearm. He contends that the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront adverse witnesses when it admitted incriminating hearsay statements of his non-testifying codefendant at their joint trial. See Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 , 88 S.Ct. 1620 , 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968). The district court agreed that the admission of the challenged hearsay statements was error, but it denied relief on the ground that the error was harmless.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review the district court’s decision to deny a petition for a writ of habeas corpus de novo. Clark v. Murphy, 331 F.3d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 124 S.Ct. 446 , 157 L.Ed.2d 313 (2003). Because Pennington filed his petition prior to the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132 (“AEDPA”), pre-AEDPA standards apply. See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 322-23…