MARA PLASCENCIA,  Petitioner-Appellant, No. 05-56458 v. D.C. No. EDWARD S. ALAMEIDA, JR.,  CV-03-02128- Director, California Department of IEG/WM Corrections, OPINION Respondent-Appellee.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Irma E. Gonzalez, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted June 8, 2006—Pasadena, California

Filed November 3, 2006

Before: Stephen Reinhardt and Stephen S. Trott, Circuit Judges, and James L. Robart,* District Judge.

Opinion by Judge Trott

*The Honorable James L. Robart, United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation.

18149 PLASCENCIA v. ALAMEIDA 18153

COUNSEL Allen R. Bloom, San Diego, California, for the petitioner- appellant. Marilyn L. George, Deputy Attorney General, San Diego, California, for the respondent-appellee.

OPINION TROTT, Circuit Judge:

Petitioner Mara Plascencia appeals the district court’s denial of her petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Plascencia 18154 PLASCENCIA v. ALAMEIDA was convicted by a jury in state court of the murder of Teresa Silva and sentenced to a prison term of fifty years to life. Plascencia claims the trial court (1) violated her Sixth Amendment right to confront adverse witnesses when it restricted cross-examination of three witnesses, (2) erred in admitting impermissible evidence, and (3) imposed an uncon- stitutional sentence enhancement. In addition to these claims, Plascencia avers her trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate the criminal background of two jailhouse infor- mants and for failing to object to the admission of certain evi- dence. We disagree and affirm the district court’s denial of Plascencia’s habeas petition.

I

In July 1998, the victim Teresa Silva and the father of her children, Manuel Galdamez, became involved in a dispute with a person whose car was blocking the couple’s garage. The person was related to Plascencia. Later that day, Plascen- cia and her cousin, “Yeni” Haro, went to Silva and Gal- damez’s apartment, angry that their relative had been “disrespected.” Yeni, Silva, and Galdamez lived in the same complex. Plascencia and Yeni challenged Silva to a fight, and the three fought just outside Silva’s residence — complete with hair pulling and fisticuffs. Later that day, in yet another battle, Silva and her sisters Joanna and Lisa fought with Plas- cencia, Yeni, and Yeni’s mother. Silva was armed with a baseball bat which she used against Yeni’s mother, knocking her unconscious.

Some three months later, Silva and Galdamez were home with their three children, Jesse, Ruben, and Maria. At approx- imately 8:00 p.m., Galdamez and Ruben went to the garage. Jesse and Maria remained in the apartment with Silva. While Galdamez and Ruben were gone, someone knocked on the door of the apartment. Jesse, who was ten years old at the time, answered the door. The person at the door told Jesse to get his mother and waited at the door while Jesse complied. PLASCENCIA v. ALAMEIDA 18155 When Silva approached the door, followed by Jesse’s sister, the visitor shot her twice at close range. The shooter then fled.

Galdamez heard the gun shots from the garage and ran back to the apartment. When his father returned, an astute Jesse called 911 to report the shooting. During that call Jesse did not name the assailant but described her as a female having blonde hair with dark streaks. Galdamez saw Silva and