Case ID: f-appx_369/html/0784-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bruce Eric SMITH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jeffery UTTECHT, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 07-36047.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 16, 2010.
    
    Filed March 3, 2010.
    Bruce Eric Smith, Walla Walla, WA, pro se.
    Alex A. Kostin, Esq., Office of the Washington Attorney General Criminal Justice Division, Olympia, WA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Washington state prisoner Bruce Eric Smith appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his jury conviction for first degree rape, first degree murder, and first degree burglary. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Smith contends that his due process rights were violated when the trial court permitted the arresting officers to testify about their observations regarding Smith’s post-arrest physical condition. Specifically, Smith contends that the officers impermissibly testified about his unresponsiveness, in violation of Wainwright v. Greenfield, 474 U.S. 284, 106 S.Ct. 634, 88 L.Ed.2d 623 (1986). The record reflects that any alleged error is harmless because it did not have a “substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 623, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993) (internal quotations omitted).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.