United States Second Circuit

Judgment granting habeas petition on challenge to sufficiency of evidence, and summarily rejecting Brady and Confrontation Clause claims, is reversed as to grant of habeas petition as raising a void-for-vagueness challenge in state court does not, without more, suffice to preserve the "substance" of an insufficiency claim for purposes of federal habeas, thus procedurally barring the claim. However, case is remanded for further fact-finding as to the extent of petitioner's or his defense counsel's knowledge of Brady information.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/22/2006
• Published 08/23/2006

Judges

• CALABRESI, Circuit Judge., Before MINER and CALABRESI, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Chief Judge, United States Court of International Trade.

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• John R. Bartels, Jr., Bartels & Feureisen, LLP, White Plains, N.Y., for the Petitioner-Appellee-Cross-Appellant., Valerie A. Livingston, Assistant District Attorney for Janet DiFiore, District Attorney of Westchester County (Richard Longworth Hecht, on the brief), White Plains, N.Y., for the Respondents-Appellants-Cross-Appellees.