Hinton

*654 MEMORANDUM **

Craig L. Hinton, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.

Hinton argues that the prosecution withheld favorable evidence during his trial, in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). Three California state courts rejected this challenge during state habeas proceedings and upheld Hinton’s conviction. After a careful review of the record, we conclude that the state court rulings were not contrary to, and did not involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d).

Hinton argues that his Brady rights were violated when the trial prosecutor failed to disclose the fact that Richard Jones — the prosecution’s eye witness — was suspected of being involved in an unrelated murder. However, Hinton failed to establish that, but for the alleged violation, “ ‘there is a reasonable probability’ that the result of the trial would have been different if the suppressed…