GASPARD v. CALIFORNIA, 323 Fed.Appx. 553 (9th Cir. 2009)
Arthur GASPARD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. People of the State ofCALIFORNIA; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
No. 07-15116.United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.Submitted April 13, 2009.[fn*]
Filed April 21, 2009.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.][fn*] The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P.34(a)(2).
Arthur Gaspard, Corcoran, CA, pro se.
Linda M. Murphy, Esq., Attorney General's Office, San Francisco, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Jeremy D. Fogel, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-05-03313-JF.
Before: GRABER, GOULD and BEA, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM[fn**]
[fn**] This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
California state prisoner Arthur Gaspard appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254
petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291
and 2253, and we affirm.
Gaspard contends that his constitutional rights were violated when a prosecution witness referred to matters which had been ordered excluded from evidence. We conclude that the state court's decision rejecting this claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, as determined by the United States Supreme Court.See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Estelle v.McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 71-75, 112 S.Ct. 475,116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991); Alberni v. McDaniel, 458 F.3d 860, 863-67
(9th Cir. 2006).
AFFIRMED.