USCA1 Opinion

       [NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]

                 United States Court of Appeals

                     For the First Circuit











No. 98-2148



                          ENRICO PAONE,



                           Petitioner,



                                v.



      COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,



                           Respondent.







           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE



         [Hon. Steven J. McAuliffe, U.S. District Judge]







                              Before



                      Selya, Circuit Judge,

                 Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge,

                   and Stahl, Circuit Judge.

                                

                                

                                

                                

     Enrico Paone on brief pro se.

     Philip T. McLaughlin, Attorney General, and Charles T. Putnam,

Senior Assistant Attorney General, on brief for respondent.











May 27, 1999







                                

                                





            Per Curiam.    Having carefully reviewed the summary

 judgment below in light of the record and the arguments on this

 appeal, we agree with the district court's conclusion that the

 New Hampshire Supreme Court's decision was neither contrary to,

 nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal

 law.  See 28 U.S.C.  2254(d)(1).  We add only that nothing in

 Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (1992), compels a

 different result on federal habeas review.  Substantially for

 the reasons stated in the district court's well-reasoned

 opinion and order of September 3, 1998, the judgment is

 affirmed.   See Loc. R. 27.1.