United States Fourth Circuit

In a conviction and death sentence for capital murder, denial of petition for federal writ of habeas corpus relief is affirmed where: 1) the state motion for appropriate relief (MAR) court's determination that production of the undisclosed evidence would not have resulted in a different verdict, either at guilt or sentencing, in petitioner's trial for the murder was not an unreasonable one; 2) given the similarities in the murders, the evidence that the same person murdered both women and that the person was the petitioner was overwhelming; 3) nondisclosure of evidence by the state was not "so serious that there is a reasonable probability that the suppressed evidence would have produced a different verdict," Strickler, 527 U.S. at 281; and 4) the state court's rejection of petitioner's Brady claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, the applicable precedents.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/03/2008
• Published 11/03/2008

Judges

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel