Dean

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner Delanoe Dean appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus based on alleged juror misconduct in his California state court trial. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2253, and 2254, and we affirm.

*549 I. The California Court of Appeal’s determination that the elevator encounter did not constitute juror misconduct comports with Supreme Court precedent.

The California Court of Appeal correctly identified the rule set forth in Mattox v. United States 1 and Remmer v. United States. 2 Therefore, its decision was not contrary to that case law. 3 The Court of Appeal’s determination that the rule did not apply also was reasonable under Mattox and Remmer, 4 There was no “communication” or “contact” between the jurors and the victim, and thus, the presumption of prejudice did not apply. 5 Accordingly, we affirm.

II. The California Superior Court’s evidentiary hearing regarding Dean’s allegation of misconduct was procedurally sufficient and thus reasonable under Supreme Court precedent.

No Supreme Court precedent clearly establishes that a judge must ask jurors whether an allegedly prejudicial…