Nava v. Knowles

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 27 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE ANDREW NAVA, No. 08-55304 Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 5:07-cv-00096-PA v. MEMORANDUM * MICHAEL KNOWLES, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Percy Anderson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 25, 2011 ** Before: TROTT, GOULD, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges. California prisoner Jose Andrew Nava appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 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. Appellant. P. 34(a)(2). Nava contends that the evidence introduced at his trial was insufficient to support the jury’s true finding on a criminal street gang enhancement. The record reflects that the California appellate court’s rejection of this claim was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, federal law; nor was it based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); People v. Gardeley, 14 Cal. 4th 605, 624 n.10 (1996). We construe Nava’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 22- 1(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per curiam). AFFIRMED. 2 08-55304