Graves

MEMORANDUM **

Demond Lanier Graves appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm.

We apply the strictures set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d) & (e) when we consider *221 Graves’s claims. That means that relief could be granted only if Graves were able to show that the decisions of the state courts were either contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law as declared by the Supreme Court; or based on an unreasonable determination of the facts. See id.; Price v. Vincent, 538 U.S. 634 , 123 S.Ct. 1848, 1852-53 , 155 L.Ed.2d 877 (2003); Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 73-76 , 123 S.Ct. 1166, 1173-75 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003); Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 412-13 , 120 S.Ct. 1495, 1523 , 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000).

The state courts rejected Graves’s claim that the use of evidence of his corrupt attempts to bribe his victim violated his Sixth Amendment rights as delineated in Massiah. 1 Were we to hold otherwise and grant relief, we would extend the existing law beyond its current borders and, thereby, violate Teague.

Of course, we recognize that the question of extension can be tricky where the new application could…