Adams

MEMORANDUM *

Patrick Cummings appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Cummings was convicted of conspiracy to commit assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to commit extortion, kidnaping, kidnaping for extortion, and first degree murder. This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Because Cummings’s federal habeas petition is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, a federal court may grant habeas relief if the state court decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1). Denial of a habeas petition is reviewed de novo. Shackleford v. Hubbard, 234 F.3d 1072, 1077 (9th Cir.2000). Where, as here, the California Supreme Court denied review of Cummings’s claims without explanation, we look to the last reasoned state court decision in conducting our habeas review. Id. at 1079, n. 2 . The relevant opinion in this case is the unpublished decision by the California Court of Appeal in People v. Foley, No’s C022388, C022361 (Cal.Ct.App. Oct.…