Browning
v. Baker, No. 15-99002 (9-20-17)(Gould w/Wardlaw; dissent by
Callahan). The 9th gave habeas relief in
this Nevada capital matter. The 9th found that in a prosecution for a robbery
and murder in a Las Vegas jewelry store, the prosecution committed Brady violations. The expectation of favorable treatment by a
witness for his testimony, an observation of a shoeprint by an officer, and the
victim's description of his assailant's hairstyle all were favorable to the petitioner. The evidence should have been turned
over. The evidence was material. As for AEDPA deference, the 9th finds that
the Nevada Supreme Court's use of the Supremes precedent was objectively
unreasonable. The 9th also granted relief for IAC as to representation. There was no Napue violation (awareness of evidence). The petitioner's escape
conviction was upheld; there was no error presented. Dissenting, Callahan argues that AEDPA
deference should control.
The decision is here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/09/20/15-99002.pdf
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home