Morgan
Morgan v. Pliler
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
California state prisoner Tyrone L. Morgan appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his conviction for attempted murder and assault with a firearm. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Reviewing de novo, see Leavitt v. Arave, 371 F.3d 663, 668 (9th Cir.2004), we affirm.
Morgan contends that he was denied a fair trial because a juror made statements *115 during deliberations regarding his experience having been shot in Vietnam and his knowledge of semi-automatic weapons in the context of a discussion of specific intent to kill. This contention lacks merit. We agree with the district court that the juror’s comments regarding his wounds in Vietnam and regarding semi-automatic weapons cannot be said to have had a substantial and injurious effect on the verdict. See Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 637 , 113 S.Ct. 1710 , 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993).
To the extent Morgan raises arguments not encompassed within the certificate of appealability (“COA”), we construe these as a motion to broaden the COA and deny the motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c)(2); 9th Cir. R. 22-l(e).