Bonnenfant

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant John L. Bonnenfant appeals the district court’s denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging his conviction. 1 We affirm. As the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history, we will not recount them here.

We review a district court’s decision to grant or deny a federal prisoner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion de novo. See United States v. Fry, 322 F.3d 1198, 1200 (9th Cir.2003). We review the court’s factual findings underlying its decision on a § 2255 motion for clear error. See United States v. Alaimalo, 313 F.3d 1188, 1191 (9th Cir.2002).

We are not persuaded by Bonnenfant’s contention that a secret romantic relationship between a court bailiff and a juror violated his right to a fair and independent jury. The district court conducted a week-long evidentiary hearing in accordance with Remmer v. United States, 347 U.S. 227, 230 , 74 S.Ct. 450 , 98 L.Ed. 654 (1954). It did not clearly err in its finding that there was no evidence, or evidence from which an inference could be drawn, that (1) there was any effort to influence the juror or any other juror in regard to the jury verdict, (2) that any extrinsic or extraneous information…