Vigil
Vigil v. Carey
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*201 MEMORANDUM *
Richard Marc Vigil appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Vigil challenges his jury trial conviction of causing the death of a child under the age of eight in his care, in violation of California Penal Code § 273ab. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AED-PA”) governs our review. Under AEDPA, we may grant relief only if the last reasoned state court decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States[,]” or the decision “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). As the California Supreme Court denied Vigil’s petition for review without comment, we review the decision of the California Court of Appeal.
Vigil first contends that the trial judge’s comments to the jury regarding the Monica Lewinsky matter amounted to a due process violation. The parties agree that the judge’s comments were not about Vigil. The judge admonished the jury twice, each time stating that his remarks had…