Sandifer

MEMORANDUM **

After his conviction in state court for first-degree murder, the petitioner filed a habeas petition with the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , claiming that the prosecutor violated his due process rights by informing the jury that his co-defendant had already been convicted for the same offense by a different jury. The district court denied relief to the petitioner. We review a district court’s decision to deny habeas relief de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. Robinson v. Ignacio, 360 F.3d 1044, 1055 (9th Cir. 2004).

As the petitioner filed for federal habeas relief from his state criminal conviction after April 24, 1996, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 applies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ; Robinson, 360 F.3d at 1055 . Accordingly, the district court could only grant the petitioner relief if he demonstrated that the state court’s decision was “(1) ‘contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,’ or was (2) ‘based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.’ ” Id.…