Wright

MEMORANDUM *

Anthony Wright, a Washington state prisoner, appeals the denial of his habeas petition by the district court. Because AEDPA governs this case, we may grant relief only if the decision of the Washington Court of Appeals dismissing his Personal Restraint Petition was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law,” or “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). We review the district court’s order de novo, Harris v. Carter, 515 F.3d 1051, 1054 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

Wright raises three claims for relief. First, he contends that his trial counsel was prejudicially ineffective for failing to seek suppression of the testimony of witness Rana Garrett. Wright contends that the police identified Garrett as a potential witness after listening to a telephone conversation between Wright and David Haynes, Garrett’s ex-husband who was then incarcerated. This conversation, he alleges, was recorded in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights, and Garrett’s testimony should have been suppressed as a fruit of the illegal recording. Wright has produced no evidence substantiating his contention…