Young

MEMORANDUM *

The facts and procedural history of the case are known to the parties, and we do not repeat them here. Petitioner Renard Reece Young presents three issues, certified by this court, in his appeal of the *672 district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A state prisoner is entitled to federal habeas relief only if the state court proceeding “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), or “in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding,” id. § 2254(d)(2). Young initially presented these claims to the California Supreme Court in his petition for writ of habeas corpus, which the court summarily denied. Therefore, we must undertake an independent review of the record and determine whether the State’s resolution of the claim was objectively unreasonable. Greene v. Lambert, 288 F.3d 1081, 1088, 1092 (9th Cir.2002).

Young claims that the state habeas court unreasonably denied his claim…