Watkins

MEMORANDUM **

Dajuma Watkins (‘Watkins”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We issued a certificate of appealability with respect to one issue: Whether the prosecution committed misconduct during closing argument in violation of appellant’s federal constitutional rights.

This court reviews de novo a district court’s decision to deny a habeas petition. Killian v. Poole, 282 F.3d 1204, 1207 (9th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1179 , 123 S.Ct. 992 , 154 L.Ed.2d 927 (2003). As the facts are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary to understand our disposition. We vacate the district court’s denial of Watkins’s habeas petition and remand so that the transcript of the state court proceedings can be obtained and reviewed.

*583 The district court should have requested, sua sponte, Watkins’s state trial transcript.

The habeas statute requires petitioners who attack the sufficiency of the evidence against them to provide the relevant record or show that they are unable to obtain it. 1 See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (f). Ninth Circuit law so recognizes. See Austad v. Ris-ley, 761 F.2d…