Smith v. Hawaii

MEMORANDUM *

Derrick Smith, a Hawaii state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition, in which he challenges his conviction of the second degree murder of his infant son. *536 His contention is that errors in three evidentiary rulings of the trial court, either singly or in combination, deprived him of due process of law. We review de novo the district court’s decision to grant or deny a § 2254 habeas petition. Bean v. Calderon, 163 F.3d 1073, 1077 (9th Cir. 1998). Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), a petitioner seeking habeas relief must demonstrate that the state court’s decision on the merits was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law” under United States Supreme Court precedent, or that the decision “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1)—(2); see also Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, 70-73 , 123 S.Ct. 1166 , 155 L.Ed.2d 144 (2003). None of the three alleged errors meets this standard.

The first challenged ruling was the admission of Smith’s statement to the baby’s mother, several weeks before the baby…