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NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 27 2011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