Harris

*571 MEMORANDUM ***

Devonte Bernard Harris appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition, which he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . The certified issue on appeal is whether Harris’s “due process rights were violated when the trial court required him to choose between requesting a continuance to prepare for trial and his right to represent himself at trial” under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Harris filed his habeas petition on September 12, 2002, after the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996); therefore, AEDPA’s provisions apply. See Delgado v. Lewis, 223 F.3d 976, 979 (9th Cir.2000). Under AEDPA, habeas relief is warranted only if the state court’s decision was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court,” or if the decision “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). At issue here is the…