Thomas

*86 MEMORANDUM **

Jason Thomas appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habe-as corpus petition challenging his convictions for first degree murder and attempted robbery, with the special circumstance that the murder was committed while engaged in the attempted robbery. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review de novo. See DeWeaver v. Runnels, 556 F.3d 995, 997 (9th Cir.2009). We affirm.

The district court correctly ruled that the state courts did not unreasonably apply Supreme Court precedent in denying Thomas’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Thomas’s offer of proof, unsupported by any affidavits, provides insufficient evidence as to each "witness’s potential testimony. See Dows v. Wood, 211 F.3d 480, 486 (9th Cir.2000). Thomas never stated whether Psycho Mike would have been available and willing to testify. See id. Tina and Hector’s accounts of the events was fairly known to defense counsel, and Thomas only speculates that they would have provided further useful information. See Bragg v. Galaza, 242 F.3d 1082, 1088 (9th Cir.2001). Kiki and Tranise’s proposed testimony is also inconsistent with the record and speculative.…