United States Ninth Circuit

In challenge to sentence after conviction of knowingly possessing a biological agent, toxin or delivery system for use as a weapon, the denial of defendant's motion to vacate is affirmed, where: 1) there is no reasonable probability that the verdict would have been different if the favorable evidence regarding the expert witness had been disclosed, and thus there was no violation under Brady v. Maryland; 2) by the same rationale, the district court did not err in denying defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; 3) the district court did not err in finding that the juror was not biased against defendant and that his inaccurate juror questionnaire responses were the result of honest oversights; and 4) there was no cumulative error that rendered the trial fundamentally unfair or violate defendant's due process rights.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/08/2013
• Published 01/08/2013

Judges

• FRIEDMAN

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel