Marks

MEMORANDUM **

Petitioner-Appellant Thomas Marks appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. As the facts and procedural history are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary to explain our disposition.

Petitions for habeas corpus relief such as this one are governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 322 , 117 S.Ct. 2059 , 138 L.Ed.2d 481 (1997). Under AEDPA, we may not grant habeas relief unless the last reasoned state court adjudication, here that of the Washington Court of Appeals, “(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States” or “(2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). We review a district court’s denial of a habeas petition de novo. Campbell v. Rice, 408 F.3d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc).

Petitioner claims that his attorney’s joint representation during a pre-trial…