Vitaly Zakouto v. James Benedetti

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. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VITALY ZAKOUTO,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JAMES BENEDETTI,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 08-15619
D.C. No. 06-CV-00133-JCM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 25, 2010**
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Nevada state prisoner Vitaly Zakouto appeals from the district court’s
judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
FILED
JUN 11 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-15619 2
Zakouto contends that the trial court violated his confrontation rights by
admitting into evidence the deceased victim’s videotaped testimony from a prior
family court proceeding. It is undisputed that the victim was unavailable to testify
at trial and that Zakouto had an opportunity to cross-examine her at the earlier
proceeding. Therefore, the state court’s decision rejecting Zakouto’s confrontation
clause claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly
established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); see also Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 59
(2004); United States v. Owens, 484 U.S. 554, 559 (1988).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --