MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Bret Allen Langford appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habe-as petition challenging his conviction for corporal injury to a spouse and related offenses. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, we review de novo, Mendez v. Small, 298 F.3d 1154, 1157-58 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

Langford contends that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by not presenting an expert witness at trial to bolster his theory of self-defense. For Langford to succeed, he must demonstrate that his attorney’s representation was deficient to such a degree as to prejudice his *463defense. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Because Langford cannot show a reasonable probability that an expert witness would have changed the result of his trial, the district court properly denied his petition. See id. at 693-94; Franklin v. Johnson, 290 F.3d 1223, 1237 (9th Cir. 2002).

AFFIRMED.