Garnett

MEMORANDUM *

James S. Garnett was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. On collateral review, the district court granted Garnett’s petition for habeas corpus for violations of due process based on claims of (1) prosecutorial misconduct and (2) insufficient jury instructions. The Attorney General of Washington (the “State”) appeals the district court’s grant of relief. Garnett cross-appeals, arguing that the district court erred in denying relief on Garnett’s claim of a Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause violation. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

We affirm the district court with regard to Garnett’s Confrontation Clause claim raised on cross-appeal. Garnett argues that the state court’s application of Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 , 124 S.Ct. 1354 , 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004), to this claim alone warrants habeas relief and that, under Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66 , 100 S.Ct. 2531 , 65 L.Ed.2d 597 (1980), Ms. Garnett’s statements should not have been admitted, because the statements did not bear “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” While the Supreme Court has…