Bamrick v. Garcia

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 04 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RICHARD D. BAMRICK, No. 06-55080 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. CV-03-02032-CAS v. MEMORANDUM * SILVA GARCIA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 15, 2009 ** Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. California state prisoner Richard D. Bamrick appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). SZ/Research Bamrick contends that similar to Gibson v. Ortiz, 387 F.3d 812, 822 (9th Cir. 2004), the interplay of CALJIC Nos. 2.50 and 2.50.1 lowered the prosecution’s burden of proof at trial, resulting in a structural error requiring automatic reversal. Because the error is not structural, we review for harmlessness. See Byrd v. Lewis, 566 F.3d 855, 867 (9th Cir. 2009). We conclude that Bamrick has failed to show that the error had a substantial and injurious effect on the verdict because the jury made special factual findings beyond a reasonable doubt regarding the underlying facts of the case. See Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 637-38 (1993). Panel does not grant en banc review. AFFIRMED. SZ/Research 2 06-55080