Berg

MEMORANDUM *

Eric Anthony Berg appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas *673 corpus. We affirm the district court. Because the parties are familiar with the procedural and factual history of this proceeding, we need not recount it here.

We can grant a petitioner habeas relief only if the state court decision was “contrary to, or involved the unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” Musladin v. Lamarque, 427 F.3d 653, 655 (9th Cir.2005) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1)).

Early v. Packer, 537 U.S. 3, 8 , 123 S.Ct. 362 , 154 L.Ed.2d 263 (2002) (quoting Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 405-06 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000)). In conducting such review, we look to the “last reasoned decision of the state court as the basis of the state court’s judgment.” Musladin, 427 F.3d at 655 (quoting Franklin v. Johnson, 290 F.3d 1223 , 1233 n. 3 (9th Cir.2002)). In this case, that is the California Court of Appeal’s unpublished decision.

The Supreme Court’s clearly established precedent on the shackling of criminal defendants applies to the use of React belts. Gonzalez v. Pliler,…