The 9th affirmed denial of a 2254 petition. It was not unreasonable for the state court to preclude an exculpatory statement of a witness in light of unreliability. The witness had made three contradictory statements, including one in which the defendant had used a firearm, and one that he had not. The court had precluded all of them. Under AEDPA, deference is given to the state courts, and its rulings as to unreliability were not unreasonable.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
The 9th affirmed denial of a 2254 petition. It was not unreasonable for the state court to preclude an exculpatory statement of a witness in light of unreliability. The witness had made three contradictory statements, including one in which the defendant had used a firearm, and one that he had not. The court had precluded all of them. Under AEDPA, deference is given to the state courts, and its rulings as to unreliability were not unreasonable.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home