King

MEMORANDUM **

Maurice Simeon King appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition. We granted a certificate of appealability on the issue “whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in violation of the Sixth Amendment by fading to move to suppress, pursuant to the Fourth Amendment, evidence seized as a result of petitioner’s initial detention and subsequent arrest.” We affirm.

No state court decision explained why the warrantless search of King did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The fed *567 eral courts therefore independently review the record to determine whether under AEDPA the state court properly denied habeas relief, focusing on whether under Supreme Court cases the state court’s resolution of the case was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. See Greene v. Lambert, 288 F.3d 1081, 1088-89 (9th Cir.2002).

Under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), King is required to show that his counsel’s performance was objectively unreasonable and that he was prejudiced by the deficient performance “to such an extent that the resulting proceedings were unreliable.” Delgado v.…