Marco Santiago Zabala v. ROBERT HOREL, Warden

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** This case was assigned, by the consent of the parties, to a Magistrate
Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1).
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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MARCO SANTIAGO ZABALA,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ROBERT HOREL, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 09-56612
D.C. No. 5:08-cv-00647-MLG
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Marc L. Goldman, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**
Submitted January 10, 2011***
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
FILED
JAN 24 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

09-56612 2
California state prisoner Marco Santiago Zabala appeals from the district
court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under
28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Zabala contends that the state court’s conclusion – that the erroneous
admission of evidence at trial was harmless – was contrary to, and an unreasonable
application of, clearly established Supreme Court law. However, Zabala has failed
to demonstrate that the state court’s application of Chapman v. California, 386
U.S. 18 (1967), was objectively unreasonable. See Mitchell v. Esparza, 540 U.S.
12, 18 (2003) (per curiam). Further, in light of the other evidence of guilt admitted
at trial, Zabala has failed to establish that the trial error had a substantial and
injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict. See Brecht v.
Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 637 (1993).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 3 --

09-56612 3

-- 3 of 3 --