Fisher

MEMORANDUM ***

David Fred Fisher appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we do not recite them here.

Wrongfully admitted evidence violates the Constitution’s Due Process Clause and warrants habeas relief “only when the questioned evidence renders the trial so fundamentally unfair as to violate federal due process.” 1 The Supreme Court has “defined the category of infractions that violate ‘fundamental fairness’ very narrowly.” 2 The alleged error in petitioner’s case, if it was constitutional *522 error at all, does not fall 'within that narrow category. A comparison with Supreme Court precedent makes this clear.

In Estelle v. McGuire, 3 the prosecutor introduced more inflammatory evidence, and the court offered a far less effective limiting instruction than in this case. 4 Moreover, the inflammatory evidence was never directly linked to the defendant. 5 Nonetheless, the Supreme Court concluded that the evidence was relevant and found no due process violation from its introduction.

In this case, the introduced evidence was…