What is the test for habeas relief under the Fourteenth Amendment in civil law?

proceedings); Middleton v. Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir. 1985) (alleged error in interpretation or application of state law not a basis for federal habeas relief).

Instead, a federal court's inquiry on habeas review is limited to whether the challenged jury instruction "violated some right which was guaranteed to the defendant by the Fourteenth Amendment." Cupp v. Naughten, 414 U.S. 141, 146 (1973). "[N]ot every ambiguity, inconsistency, or deficiency in a jury instruction rises to the level of a due process violation." Id. On federal review, the pertinent question is whether the challenged instruction "so infused the trial with unfairness as to deny due process of law." Estelle, 502 U.S. at 75. Relevant to this inquiry is "'whether there is a reasonable likelihood that the jury has applied the challenged instruction in a way' that violates the Constitution." Id. (quoting Boyde v. California, 494 U.S. 370, 380 (1990)).