Thol

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Vouty Thol (“Thol”) appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, arguing that a jury instruction error had a substantial and injurious effect on the jury’s verdict in his case. We review the district court’s ruling de novo, Byrd v. Lewis, 566 F.3d 855, 859 (9th Cir.2009), and we affirm.

Thol was tried and convicted of first degree attempted murder and, in the alternative, first degree assault of Bunny Vath (“Vath”). The Washington state court entered judgment and sentenced Thol on the first degree attempted murder charge only. Thol appealed, contending that his conviction and sentence should be reversed because of a faulty jury instruction. The Washington Court of Appeals acknowledged that the accomplice liability instruction given at Thol’s trial was similar to one found to be defective by the Washington *454 Supreme Court. State v. Trujillo, 112 Wash.App. 390 , 49 P.3d 935, 941 (2002) (citing State v. Roberts, 142 Wash.2d 471 , 14 P.3d 713 (2000)). Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals held that “because the record demonstrates conclusively that such error could not have materially affected the jury’s deliberations in this case ...…