Raposa v. Bissonnette , 290 F. App'x 374 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                   Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit
    No. 07-2061
    ROBIN RAPOSA,
    Petitioner, Appellant,
    v.
    LYNN BISSONETTE, SUPERINTENDENT,
    Respondent, Appellee.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
    [Hon. Nancy Gertner, U.S. District Judge]
    Before
    Boudin, Selya and Dyk,*
    Circuit Judges.
    Donald A. Harwood for petitioner.
    Scott A. Katz, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Bureau,
    with whom Martha Coakley, Attorney General, was on brief for
    respondent.
    September 4, 2008
    *
    Of the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation.
    Per Curiam.     Petitioner Robin Raposa appeals from the
    district court's judgment denying her petition for a writ of habeas
    corpus. 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2000).
    Raposa's petition challenged her Massachusetts state
    court conviction for first degree murder and conspiracy to commit
    murder in connection with the death of her husband, Robert Raposa.
    Although the district court denied relief, it granted a certificate
    of appealability on several of Raposa claims of asserted error:
    specifically, that the prosecutor's summation violated Raposa's due
    process   rights,    as   did   aspects    of    the   prosecutor's   cross-
    examination and the state court's subsequent admission of allegedly
    prejudicial evidence.
    The Commonwealth, in turn, argues that Raposa failed to
    exhaust her federal constitutional claims in the Massachusetts
    Supreme   Judicial     Court    ("SJC").        In   the   alternative,   the
    Commonwealth argues that the SJC's decision was neither contrary
    to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal
    law.
    The district court found that Raposa had exhausted her
    federal claims below, but that there was no error in the SJC's
    decision warranting a grant of the writ.             We have given Raposa's
    arguments careful consideration but in the end see no reason to
    differ with, or add to, either part of the district court's
    thoughtful and well-reasoned opinion.
    Affirmed.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-2061

Citation Numbers: 290 F. App'x 374

Judges: Boudin, Selya, Dyk

Filed Date: 9/4/2008

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024