Vega v. Walsh, 669 F.3d 123

Police discovered Thomas Hill's body in Kissena Park, Queens, shot multiple times.
Vega and a co-defendant were arrested and Vega was tried twice in 2002, with a conviction on the second trial.
During trial, the government introduced evidence of uncharged crimes and Vega's tattoo reading 'Enforcer'.
A medical examiner (Dr. Reiber) testified regarding Hill's autopsy based on another doctor's report; the autopsy report itself was not admitted.
Vega was convicted of second-degree murder and two weapon counts and sentenced to 25 years to life.
Appellate and state courts denied post-conviction relief; Vega sought habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which was denied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
admissibility of uncharged-crime evidence and tattoo	Vega argued the evidence was unfairly prejudicial	State argued evidentiary rulings were proper and not unreasonable	No error; not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law
Confrontation Clause impact of autopsy testimony	Autopsy testimony based on a report by another pathologist violated Crawford	Autopsy reports not testimonial; admissible as public/business records	Not violation; testimony permissible under Crawford framework as applied by court at time
retroactivity of Melendez-Diaz/Bullcoming for habeas review	Rule should apply retroactively to Vega	New rule not retroactive; not clearly established at the time of state judgment	Relief denied; not contrary to clearly established federal law as of state adjudication

Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (U.S. 1991) (state evidentiary rulings generally not basis for habeas relief)
Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (U.S. 1986) (reluctance to impose constitutional constraints on evidentiary rulings)
Dowling v. United States, 493 U.S. 342 (U.S. 1990) (unfairness standard for evidentiary errors)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (testimonial hearsay and Confrontation Clause framework)
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 129 S. Ct. 2527 (S. Ct. 2009) (testimonial certificates of analysis; cross-examination rights)
Bullcoming v. New Mexico, 131 S. Ct. 2705 (S. Ct. 2011) (testimonial lab reports; extending Confrontation Clause protection)
Feliz v. City of New York, 467 F.3d 227 (2d Cir. 2006) (autopsy reports not necessarily testimonial; public records)
Greene v. Fisher, 132 S. Ct. 38 (S. Ct. 2011) ( Santiago—standard for § 2254(d) review; law as of state-court decision)
Cullen v. Pinholster, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (S. Ct. 2011) (limits habeas review to record evidence before state court when denying relief)
Lockyer v. Andrade, 538 U.S. 63 (U.S. 2003) (clarifies § 2254(d) standard timing)