Bryon Koering v. Terri Gonzalez

MEMORANDUM

Pursuant to a limited certificate of ap-pealability, Byron Koering challenges, the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition. We affirm.

Our habeas review is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”). AEDPA provides that if a federal habeas petitioner is in custody pursuant to a state court judgment and the petitioner’s “claim ... was adjudicated on the merits in” state court proceedings, our review is deferential. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). We may grant the writ only if: (1) the state adjudication “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of’ clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court; or (2) the state adjudication “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented.” Id. § § 2254(d)(l)-(2).

The California Court of Appeal’s decision affirming the trial court’s decision not to instruct on a lesser included offense does not satisfy either prong of § 2254(d). Koering was entitled to jury instructions regarding his theory of defense, and the trial court’s instructions were consistent with his theory. See Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 , 108…