MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Harold Morales appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Morales contends that the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment rights by admitting statements by the woman he was convicted of murdering. Morales argues that Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353, 128 S.Ct. 2678, 171 L.Ed.2d 488 (2008), applies retroactively, or alternatively, the state court’s application of the “forfeiture by wrongdoing” doctrine was contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly *729 established federal law as determined by the United States Supreme Court at the time of his appeal. These contentions are foreclosed. See Ponce v. Felker, 606 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2010).

AFFIRMED.