Bruce Eric Smith v. Jeffery Uttecht

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
AH/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BRUCE ERIC SMITH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JEFFERY UTTECHT,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 07-36047
D.C. No. CV-06-05678-RJB
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert J. Bryan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
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
FILED
MAR 03 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AH/Research 07-36047
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. 384 (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 (1993) (internal quotations omitted).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --