Case Name: Mario Arron NEWSOME, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Larry SCRIBNER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-23
Citations: 360 F. App'x 770
Docket Number: No. 07-56117
Parties: Mario Arron NEWSOME, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Larry SCRIBNER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 360
Pages: 770–770

Head Matter:
Mario Arron NEWSOME, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Larry SCRIBNER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 07-56117.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 15, 2009.
Filed Dec. 23, 2009.
Kurt David Hermansen, Law Office of Kurt David Hermansen, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
Mario Arron Newsome, Calipatria, CA, pro se.
Kevin R. Vienna, Esquire, Kyle Niki Cox Shaffer, Esquire, Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Larry Scriber is substituted for his predecessor, S.J. Ryan, as Warden of Calipatria State Prison, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Mario Arron Newsome 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.
Newsome contends that the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation by admitting prior out-of-court statements made by five declarants who testified at trial but could not recall whether they made the prior statements. The district court correctly determined that the California Court of Appeal's rejection of Newsome's Sixth Amendment claims was not contrary to, and did not involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); see also United States v. Owens, 484 U.S. 554, 559-60, 108 S.Ct. 838, 98 L.Ed.2d 951 (1988); California v. Green, 399 U.S. 149, 164, 90 S.Ct. 1930, 26 L.Ed.2d 489 (1970).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.