United States Ninth Circuit

The district court's denial of habeas relief is affirmed, where: 1) there was no clearly established federal law, based on decisions of the United States Supreme Court, that held a forensic analyst's testimony violated the Confrontation Clause in circumstances where the analyst participated in and reviewed the crime lab's work, even though she did not personally conduct all the testing herself; and 2) the failure of defense counsel to object to the analyst's testimony on Confrontation Clause grounds did not represent deficient performance by counsel and did not prejudice the defendant.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/30/2012
• Published 05/30/2012

Judges

• Clifton

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Mark D. Eibert, Steve Oetting