Tran

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Grateful Tran, convicted of first-degree murder for a drive-by shooting, appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Because AEDPA’s deferential standard controls our decision, we affirm.

First, Tran argues that he was deprived of his due process “right to a fair opportunity to defend against the State’s accusations,” Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284, 194 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973), and “a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense,” California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 , 104 S.Ct. 2528 , 81 L.Ed.2d 413 (1984). He challenges the trial judge’s exclusion of circumstantial evidence that he believes would have suggested that the victim directed racial epithets at him, and was motivated by racial animus in attacking Tran’s cousin and possibly Tran himself. Tran believes that the excluded evidence was crucial to his provocation defense. Because there was no direct evidence in the record suggesting that Tran or his cousin actually heard any racial epithets from the victim, or that any such epithets were uttered in connection with the confrontation, we are unable to say…