Valerie E. Campbell v. Gloria Henry

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VALERIE E. CAMPBELL,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
GLORIA HENRY,
Respondent-Appellee.
No. 15-17157
D.C. No. 3:06-cv-02225-CRB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Charles R. Breyer, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 10, 2018**
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and RAWLINSON and WATFORD, Circuit
Judges.
The district court properly denied Valerie Campbell’s petition for a writ of
habeas corpus. Campbell cannot show that the state court’s decision rejecting her
ineffective assistance of counsel claim was contrary to or based on an
FILED
JAN 16 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 3 --

Page 2 of 3
unreasonable application of federal law. Even assuming that trial counsel’s failure
to introduce Andrea Johnson’s dying declaration constituted deficient performance,
the record supports the state court’s conclusion that counsel’s error was not
prejudicial.
At trial, the prosecution alleged that Campbell was a direct perpetrator, but it
alternatively argued that Campbell was guilty of each offense because she aided
and abetted her boyfriend, Carl Sampson. Under that theory, evidence that
Sampson rather than Campbell shot the victim does not exculpate Campbell.
Given the additional evidence of Campbell’s involvement, the state court could
conclude that it is not “reasonably likely” that the introduction of Johnson’s
statement would have resulted in a different outcome. Harrington v. Richter, 562
U.S. 86, 111 (2011).
Nor did the state court unreasonably apply federal law when it determined
that there was sufficient evidence to uphold Campbell’s first-degree murder
conviction under the theory that Campbell was a direct perpetrator. There was
strong evidence of premeditation and deliberation. In the months before the
shooting, Campbell and Sampson had repeatedly threatened Johnson and
Johnson’s girlfriend, Jewell Sutton. After learning that Johnson and Sutton were
visiting a home nearby, Campbell and Sampson arrived at the home armed with

-- 2 of 3 --

Page 3 of 3
weapons. Sutton testified that she saw Campbell holding a gun, and Sampson
carried an Uzi. Although Sampson fired his Uzi at Johnson, a ballistics expert
testified that the fatal bullets came from a .38 handgun. Viewing the evidence in
the light most favorable to the government, see Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307,
319 (1979), the state court could reasonably conclude that sufficient evidence
supported Campbell’s first-degree murder conviction as a direct perpetrator.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --