Celoaliaj

MEMORANDUM **

Ervin Celoaliaj brings this habeas appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , claiming that the district court erred in denying his claims of juror misconduct and suppression of evidence under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). We affirm the district court’s denial of the habeas petition.

The state trial court held an evidentiary hearing and canvassed the jurors regard *199 ing the juror misconduct claims. After considering all the evidence, the state court found that there was no outside influence on the jury. This determination by the trial court was not unreasonable under § 2254. See Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209, 218 , 102 S.Ct. 940 , 71 L.Ed.2d 78 (1982) (“[T]his case is a federal habeas action in which [state court] findings are presumptively correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)____ [F]ederal courts in such proceedings must not disturb the findings of state courts unless the federal habeas court articulates some basis for disarming such findings of the statutory presumption that they are correct and may be overcome only by convincing evidence.”).

Also, in the circumstances of this case, the trial court’s efforts in…