McCrea

McCrea v. Lamarque

Good Law
167 F. App'x 649
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 2006Nos. 04-57066, 05-55106California345 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioners, Terrance McCrea and Tracy Lamont Batts, appeal the district court’s denial of their petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that their convictions violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we AFFIRM.

The state court’s decision was not contrary to clearly established federal law. The state court properly stated the rule from the controlling Supreme Court prece dent — Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 , 102 S.Ct. 2083 , 72 L.Ed.2d 416 (1982).

Further, the application of Kennedy was not objectively unreasonable. First, the state court properly deferred to the trial judge’s finding of fact regarding the prosecutors’ intent to cause a mistrial. See *651 Kennedy, 456 U.S. at 677 , 102 S.Ct. 2083 n. 7 (recognizing that appellate judges defer to the judgment of trial judges on whether the prosecutor intended to cause a mistrial). Second, the state court properly reviewed the entire record to determine that substantial evidence supports the trial judge’s finding that the prosecutors did not intend to cause a mistrial. It was not objectively unreasonable for the state court to emphasize the strength of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.