Parker

MEMORANDUM *

Kerry L. Parker, Jr. petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, contending that the state trial court violated his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. We deny Parker’s petition because he fails to establish that the trial court’s dismissal of a juror was a clearly established constitutional vio *82 lation under Supreme Court law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1).

1. The right to a unanimous jury is not among the Sixth Amendment rights extended to state criminal defendants by the Fourteenth Amendment. Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404, 406 , 92 S.Ct. 1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972). Because Parker does not possess the right to a unanimous jury under the “Constitution or laws ... of the United States,” that right cannot form the basis for his Sixth Amendment claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (c)(3).

2. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does, however, protect against the “arbitrary deprivation” of a liberty interest to which a defendant is “entitled under state law.” See Hicks v. Oklahoma, 447 U.S. 343, 346 , 100 S.Ct. 2227 , 65 L.Ed.2d 175 (1980). The relevant state law in Parker’s case, California law, generally “entitle[s]” criminal defendants to a unanimous jury…