T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. T he H onor abl e R i c ha r d M i l l s , S e ni orU ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f orthe ** C e ntr a l D i s tr i c tof

I l l i noi s , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T FE RNAN DO DO M I NG UEZ, P e titio n e r- A p p e lla n t, v. TO M FELK ER, R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 09- 16976 D . C . N o . 5 : 0 7 -cv -0 2 2 4 1 -JF ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia J e r e m y D . F oge l , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r15, 2010 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B e f or e : W A L L A C E a nd T H O M A S , C i r c ui tJ udge s , a nd M I L L S , S e ni or D i stri ctJudg e. ** D om i ngue z pe t i t i one d f oraw r i tof

habe a s c orpus f

ol l ow i ng hi s c onvi c t i on i n C al i forni a s t at e c ou rtfor f i rs t -degree fe l on y m urder, rape, and agg ra vat ed k i d n ap i n g . We h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C . § § 1 2 9 1 a n d 2 2 5 3 , a n d we 

# FI LED OC T 14 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

r e v ie w th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s d e c is io n to d e n y aw r it o f h ab e a s c o rp u s d e n o v o . Moor v. P alm er , 6 0 3 F. 3 d 6 5 8 , 6 6 0 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 1 0 ) . W e a f f i rm. D o m in g u e z a s s e rts th a t th e n o te f r o m h is ju ry d e m o n s tr a te s to ac e r ta in ty thatthe j urors a ct i vel y c on si dere d a theory of the ca se w here by D om i ng uez k i d n ap ed an d rap ed th e v i ct i m an d th en m erel y w at ch ed o r w al k ed aw ay, an d Jo se M a rt i ne z , hi s de c e a s e d a c c om pl i c e , ki l l e d he r . B a s e d on the r e c or d be f or e us , one c a n onl y s pe c ul a t e a s t o w ha tthe j ury w a s thi nki ng w he n i ts e ntthe not e . P e rhaps aj ur orbr i e f

l y e nt e rt a i ne d the not i on tha tM a r t i ne z w a s the ki l l e rbe f or e c ha ngi ng hi s orhe rm i nd, orm a ybe s om e of the j ur or s w e r e m e r e l y c ur i ous aboutthe e le m e n ts o f

f e lo n y m u r d e r . G iv e n th e n u m b e ro f p lau s ib le e x p la n a tio n s , th e n o te fr om the j ury a l on e s i m pl y does notes t abl i sh thatthe j urors bel i eved M art i nez, ra th erth an D o m in g u ez , w as th e a ctu al k il ler. T o th e e x ten t th at D o m in g u ez ’s h ab e a s c la im s a r e b a s e d o n p u r e s p e c u la tio n , h is c la im s f a il. Cf . U ni ted Stat es v. Kim , 1 9 6 F .3 d 1 0 7 9 , 1 0 8 2

– 8 3 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) ( r e je c tin g s p e c u la tiv e a r g u m e n ts p r e m is e d o n a n a m b ig u o u s n o te f r o m th e ju ry ) . E ven ass um i ng thaton e or m ore m em bers of D om i ng uez’ s j ury w as u n c e rt a i n a s t o w h e th e rD o mi n g u e z , M ar t i n e z , o rb o th s tr a n g l e d th e v i c t i m, D om i ng uez’ s c on vi ct i on for f el on y m urder w as nei ther c on traryt o, no r an u n r e a s o n ab le ap p lic a tio n o f , c le a r ly e s tab lis h e d S u p r e m e C o u r t p r e c e d e n t. See 283

U . S . C . § 2 25 4(d)(1)–(2). D om i ng uez c on t ends thathi s due proces s r i gh t s w er e vi ol a t e d by the tr i a l c ourt ’ s f a i l ur e t o i ns truc tthe j uryon c e r t a i n e l e m e nt s of C a lif o rn ia ’s f e lo n y m u r d e rru le . A n y in s tru c tio n a l e rr o r , h o w e v e r , w a s h a rm le s s . See U ni ted Stat es v. N

eder , 52 7 U . S . 1, 19 –2 0 (19 99 ). E ven i f D om i ng uez’ s j ury det erm i ned thathe ki dn aped and b rut al l y r aped hi s vi ct i m and then st oo d i dl y by a s M art i nez ki l l ed her, as a m att erof C al i forni a l aw thi s s at i sf i es the “ l og i ca l c o n n e c tio n ” e le m e n t o f

th e s ta te ’s f

e lo n y m u r d e rru le . See P e o p le v . C a v itt , 33 C al . 4th 1 87 , 19 6, 20 3 (20 04 ). S i m i l ar l y, even i f the j ury di d n otfi nd thatM art i nez i nt e nde d t o a i d a nd abe tD om i ngue z i n the unde r l y i ng r ape , C a l i f orni a ’ s f e l ony m u r d e rru le d id n o t r e q u ir e th e ju ry to d o s o . See P eopl e v . D om i ng uez , 3 9 C a l. 4 th 1 1 4 1 , 1 1 6 2 ( 2 0 0 6 ) , c i t i ng C a v itt , 3 3 C a l. 4 th 1 8 7 . B e c au s e w e a r e b o u n d b y as ta te c o u rt’s in te rp r e ta tio n o f its o w n la w s , s e e Mul lane y v . W i lbur , 421 U . S . 684, 691 & n . 1 1 (1 9 7 5 ), D o m i n g u ez’ s i n stru ct i o n al -erro r cl ai m d o es n o tp ersu ad e u s. W e a l so re

j ec tD om i ng uez’ s argum entthathi s due proces s r i gh t s w er e vi ol at ed un der B o u ie v . C ity o f C o lu m b ia , 378 U . S . 347 ( 1964) , by ar e tr oa c t i ve j ud i ci al al t er at i on of the st at e’ s f el on y m urder rul e. E ven i f the j ury det erm i ned tha tD om i ngue z ki dnape d a nd brut a l l y r ape d the vi c t i m w hi l e M a r t i ne z l ooke d on and thatD om i ng uez then p as si vel y w at ched as M art i nez s trang l ed her, m ore than thi rty y e a r s e a r l i e rthe C a l i f orni aS upr e m e C our tuphe l d ac onvi c t i on f orf e l ony4

m u r d e ro n a lm o s t id e n tic a l f a c ts . See P eo

p le v. W h i teh o rn , 60 C a l . 2d 256, 260, 264 ( 1963) . D om i ngue z ’ s f e l ony - m ur de rc onvi c t i on w a s not“ une xpe c t e d” or

“ i nd ef ensi bl e. ” See R og er

s v . T enness ee , 53 2 U . S . 45 1, 46 1 (20 01 ). D om i ng uez nextar gu es thathi s c on vi ct i on for a gg ra vat ed ki dn api ng vi ol at es B o u ie , be c aus e the s t a t e j udi c i a ry r e tr oa c t i ve l y a l t e r e d the a s por t a t i on e l e m e ntof th a t o f f e n s e . D o m in g u e z m is ap p r e h e n d s C a lif o rn iala w , h o w e v e r , w h e n h e a s s e rts th a ta g g r a v a t e d k i d n ap i n g r e q u i r e d a s p o r t a t i o n i n e x c e s s o f n i n e ty f e e ta tth e t i me of hi s c r i m e s . I n 1994, thr e e y e a r s pr i ort o D om i ngue z ’ s i l l e ga l c onduc t , the C al i forni a S up re m e C ou rtexpl i ci t l y hel d that“ no m i ni m um nu m ber of f ee t ” w as r e q u ir e d to s a tis f

y th e a s p o rta tio n e le m e n t o f a g g r a v a te d k id n ap in g . See P eopl e v . R a yf o rd , 9 C al . 4th 1 , 12 (199 4). T hu s, tho ug h h e a sport ed hi s vi ct i m l es s than thi rty f e e t , D om i ngue z ha d “ f

a i rw a rni ng” tha tthi s di s t a nc e c oul d s a t i s f y the a s p o rta tio n e le m e n t o f

a g g r a v a te d k id n ap in g . See R o g ers , 5 3 2 U .S . a t 4 6 2 . F i na l l y , w e de ny D om i ngue z ’ s r e que s tt o e xpa nd the c e r t i f i c a t e of ap p e a lab ility to c o n s id e rh is s u f f ic ie n c y o f

th e e v id e n c e c la im b e c au s e th is c la im f a i l s t o m a ke a“ s ubs t a nt i a l s how i ng of the de ni a l of

ac ons t i tut i ona l r i ght . ” 28 U . S . C . § 2 25 3(c) (2). AF F I RME D.