Did the Ninth Circuit's finding that Trujillo's Due Process rights were not violated by the joinder of unrelated charges so clearly misapply the law as to call for summary reversal?

QUESTION PRESENTED Trujillo’s trial was rendered fundamentally unfair due to the joint trial of unrelated charges and the admission of highly prejudicial gang evidence relevant to just three of the twelve substantive counts. When examining whether a joinder of charges rendered a trial fundamentally unfair, courts look at whether the evidence related to each charge would have been admissible in a separate trial of the jointly tried charges. Here, the evidence was not cross-admissible. This was particularly prejudicial given the gang enhancements alleged on three counts. Highly prejudicial and inflammatory gang testimony was admitted even though it would have been inadmissible in separate trials. The Fourteenth Amendments’ Due Process Clause guarantees the right to a fair trial. Did the Ninth Circuit’s finding that Trujillo’s Due Process rights were not violated by the joinder of unrelated charges so clearly misapply the law as to call for summary reversal? I PARTIES AND LIST OF PRIOR PROCEEDINGS The parties to this proceeding are Petitioner Freddy Angel Trujillo and Respondent Raymond Madden. The California Attorney General represents Respondent. Trujillo was convicted by jury in the Los Angeles County Superior Court on August 22, 2014 in People v. Freddy Angel Trujillo, case no. PA072515. Judgment was entered against Trujillo on October 3, 2014. Clerk’s Transcript, district court docket 20-14, lodgment M, at 443-448, 485491. The California Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment on appeal in an unpublished opinion filed on March 14, 2016 in People v. Trujillo, case no. B259572. Petitioner’s