Lewis

MEMORANDUM **

David De La Rosa, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the denial of his habeas corpus petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . He claims that his “three strikes” sentence of 25 years to life imprisonment violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual pun *673 ishment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s denial of a habeas corpus petition. Tanner v. McDaniel, 493 F.3d 1135, 1138-39 (9th Cir.2007). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), a habeas petition may be granted only if the state court’s decision was either contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, as determined by the United States Supreme Court, or was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state court proceeding. Schroeder v. Tilton, 493 F.3d 1083, 1084-86 (9th Cir.2007). A sentence violates the Eighth Amendment if it is grossly disproportionate to the crimes committed. Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 71 , 123 S.Ct. 1166 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003). It is only in an “extremely rare” case that the defendant’s sentence, weighed…