Opinion ID: 1704551
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Impeachment of Harvey Woodall

Text: Sireci argues that the State withheld information contained in a statement by Woodall given to the police which would have been used to impeach Woodall's testimony at trial. In this statement, Woodall states that Sireci told him he was wearing a green sweatshirt at the time of the murder, thus undermining the State's theory that he wore a denim jacket. The jacket found in the nearby abandoned motel played an important role in the guilt phase. However, it seems somewhat of a stretch to refer to it, as appellant does, as the centerpiece of the State's case. Specifically, and as pointed out by the trial court below, at least four different people testified at trial to conversations with Sireci in which he confessed to the murder and robbery of Mr. Poteet. An independent review of the record indicates that, in total, seven different people testified that appellant confessed to them that he had murdered Howard Poteet. [16] Those confessions were all consistent, detailed accounts of the murder. Thus, we find that there is no reasonable probability that this evidence could put [this] whole case in such a different light as to undermine confidence in the verdict. Strickler (quoting Kyles, 514 U.S. at 435, 115 S.Ct. 1555). Sireci also maintains that the State provided favors to Woodall in exchange for his testimony. Namely, Sireci suggests the possibility that the state attorney responsible for the guilt phase of the proceedings paid the hotel bill for the accommodations used by Woodall during trial, which included charges for alcoholic beverages. This claim is entirely without merit. Appellant argues that  [i]f the State Attorney paid this bill for Mr. Woodall, this information would have undermined his credibility as a witness. (Emphasis supplied.) Appellant is, however, unable to tie this allegation to any evidence. Moreover, even if this allegation were true, which appellant does not suggest given his use of the word if, and even if Woodall's entire credibility would have been diminished by this fact, the State still introduced six other confessions. Thus, we again find no reasonable probability that this information, if in fact accurate, would undermine our confidence in the verdict.