What is the test for habeas relief in a confrontation case?

In determining whether petitioner's confrontation rights were violated, the court conducts a two-part inquiry. See Wood v. Alaska, 957 F.2d 1544, 1549-50 (9th Cir. 1992).

Page 11

First, the court considers whether the excluded evidence is relevant. If the excluded evidence is not relevant, there is no constitutional violation. If the excluded evidence is relevant, the court then considers whether other legitimate interests outweigh the defendant's interest. See Wood, 957 F.2d at 1550. Further, if a constitutional error occurred, habeas relief is warranted only if such error "had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury's verdict." Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 623 (1993).