Wauls
Wauls v. Roe
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
California state prisoner Samuel Lee Wauls appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. Wauls asserts that (1) the trial court violated his constitutional right to be present at a critical stage of the trial by allowing the jury to play back a witness’s audio-taped statement in Wauls’s absence, (2) the trial court violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment by admitting the tape into evidence, and (3) the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the tape after jury deliberations had begun. Wauls also seeks to broaden the certificate of appealability (COA) to encompass four uncertified issues. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we affirm the district court and deny Wauls’s motion to expand the COA.
We review the denial of a habeas petition de novo. Alcala v. Woodford, 334 F.3d 862, 868 (9th Cir.2003). Wauls’s petition is governed by the Antiterrorism and *181 Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), which bars a federal court from granting habeas relief unless the state court’s adjudication on the merits resulted in a decision that was (1) contrary to, or involved…