Opinion ID: 168528
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Exclusion of Mr. Bayless's testimony at the sentencing stage

Text: 97 Mr. Short contends that the exclusion of Mr. Bayless's testimony also substantially affected the outcome of the sentencing stage. At sentencing, the prosecutor told the jury that in jail [Mr. Short] bragged about how he'd thrown a fire bomb on Robert. Rec. vol. VI, at 141. Mr. Short maintains that his inability to confront and controvert this evidence prejudiced him. However, the OCCA concluded that Mr. Bayless's testimony as proffered would not directly contradict Mr. Brown's testimony regarding the confession. As we held above, the OCCA's determination that Mr. Short did not show that he was substantially prejudiced by the exclusion of Mr. Bayless's testimony was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. Thus, the OCCA's rejection of this challenge to the sentencing proceedings also was not unreasonable. 98