Smith v. Hall

August 1, 1995 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 95-1057 ANTHONY SMITH, Petitioner, Appellant, v. TIMOTHY HALL, Respondent, Appellee. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock, U.S. District Judge] Before Selya, Cyr and Boudin, Circuit Judges. Willie J. Davis, Davis, Robinson & White, on brief for appellant. Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General, and William J. Meade, Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellee. Per Curiam. Anthony Smith appeals from the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition. See Smith v. Hall, 874 F. Supp. 441 (D. Mass. 1995). The district court concluded that Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) (plurality opinion), and its progeny barred consideration of the merits of Smith's petition because Smith sought a new, constitutional rule of criminal procedure which was not a "watershed" rule of criminal procedure. Finding no error in the court's decision, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated at length by the district court. See Loc. R. 27.1. Affirmed.