Document: 540 U.S. 668 BANKSv.DRETKE, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION. No. 02-8286. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 8, 2003. Decided February 24, 2004. After police found a gun-shot corpse near Texarkana, Texas, Deputy Sheriff Willie Huff learned that the decedent had been seen with petitioner Banks three days earlier. When paid informant told was driving to Dallas fetch weapon, followed residence there. On return trip, stopped Banks's vehicle, handgun, and arrested car's occupants. Returning residence, encountered Charles Cook recovered second gun, which said left at several testing, gun proved be murder weapon. Prior trial, State advised defense counsel that, without necessity motions, would provide all discovery he entitled. Nevertheless, withheld evidence have allowed discredit two essential prosecution witnesses. At trial's guilt phase, testified, inter alia, admitted "kill[ing a] white boy." cross-examination, thrice denied talking anyone about his testimony. In fact, prosecutors intensively coached testimony during least one pretrial session. The Cook's misstatements stand uncorrected. capital conviction, penalty-phase jury probably commit criminal acts violence constitute continuing threat society. One State's witnesses, Robert Farr, testified retrieved from in order robberies. According "take care it" if trouble arose those crimes. Two witnesses impeached but were, turn, impeached. among other things, although traveled obtain no intent participate robberies, Farr alone planned commit. summation, suggested not only supply Stressing Farr's care" arising urged find credible. admission used narcotics, suggested, indicated open honest every way. did disclose who trip. judge sentenced death. Through direct appeal, continued hold secret links police. 1992 state-court postconviction motion, alleged for first time knowingly failed turn over exculpatory revealed as arrest "set-up." also deliberately information deal made Cook, critical jury's assessment credibility. asserted actions violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83, 87, held prosecution's suppression requested by favorable an accused violates due process where is material either or punishment, irrespective good bad faith. allegations, state court rejected claims. 1996, filed instant federal habeas petition, alleging, relevant, revealing Banks' further concealed incentive testify manner prosecution. attached affidavits 1999 motion seeking evidentiary hearing. declaration stated agreed help investigation out fear him on drug charges; $200; "set [Banks] up" convincing drive retrieve gun. recalled participated practice sessions before trial must they wanted spend rest life prison. response Magistrate Judge's disclosure proceeding, gave transcript September 1980 interrogation prosecutors. This provided compelling tutored, bear whether hearing acknowledged, time, involvement case. A prosecutor however, offered gain Judge recommended writ corpus respect death sentence based on, failure status. recommend disturbing guilt-phase verdict, concluding this regard properly pleaded claim transcript. District adopted report argument treated raised pleadings, under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 15(b). Fifth Circuit reversed extent granted relief claim. Appeals recognized prior proceedings, suppressed status part nonetheless concluded act diligently develop facts underpinning when pursued application. That lack diligence, held, rendered uncovered proceeding procedurally barred. any event, ruled, "material" purposes. so, Circuit's judgment, because bringing unreliable Arkansas, much corroborated including himself, acknowledged willingness get use certificate appealability accord Court, assertion aired implied consent, 15(b) required it pleadings. Held: erred dismissing denying conceal significant impeaching possession, ordinarily incumbent set record straight. Pp. 689-706. (a) Both claims regime place Antiterrorism Effective Death Penalty Act 1996 (AEDPA). P. 689. (b) claim, trains sentence, All elements are satisfied its bearing reliability verdict regarding punishment. Because has demonstrated cause prejudice, precluded gaining produce anterior proceedings. 690-703. (1) Pre-AEDPA law exhaust available remedies pursue federal-court relief. See, e. g., Rose Lundy, 455 509. requirement alleging application Farr. Banks, establishing served Huff's informant. forum, show thereby barred producing substantiate entitled could both court, actual prejudice resulting failure. Keeney Tamayo-Reyes, 504 1, 11. prosecutorial misconduct elements. Strickler Greene, 527 263, 281-282. Beyond debate, such element—that issue impeaching—is here. plainly qualifies advantageous Banks. Cause case parallel third components. Corresponding issue—a shows reason proceedings relevant evidence. Coincident component—that ensued— within compass "cause prejudice" exists Ibid. Thus, succeeds demonstrating will succeed 690-691. (2) shown failing present capable substantiating As instructs, S., 289, inquiries underlie "cause" determination: evidence; reasonably relied file policy fulfilling duty (3) confirmed petitioner's reliance asserting already received everything known government. congruent respects. First, knew of, kept back, arrangement Huff. Cf. Kyles Whitley, 514 419, 437. Second, asserted, eve material. cannot faulted relying representation. See Strickler, 283-284. Third, answer application, assertions representation disclosed regard, stronger than petitioner's: Each misrepresented dealings police, Giglio States, 405 150, 153. appropriately assumed engage improper litigation conduct conviction. None arguments distinguishing accounts adequately concealment misrepresentation link light misrepresentations, appropriate diligence pursuing court. Nor fault move, investigative assistance so inquire into connections, aid. Further, Roviaro 353 53, concerned Government's obligation reveal identity does call witness, support position. 692-698. materiality standard met "the taken put whole different undermine confidence verdict." Kyles, 435. role scenario led indictment. declaration, presented asserts initiated proposal facilitate Had instigated, upon request, excursion slim, any, continue committing violent acts. instigating role, moreover, dampened zeal urging consider acquisition robbery "planned violence." record, propensity crucial Without testimony, underscored fetched stress placed uncorroborated belies suggestion corroborated. doubt importance contrast "cause," "prejudice," id., 292-296, existence "prejudice" marked. centerpiece cast large ultimately obtained introduced proceeding. jurors interest obtaining favor receipt funds up, might well distrusted and, insofar uncorroborated, disregarded it. jury, benefit customary, truth-promoting precautions generally accompany Such poses serious credibility questions. therefore, long defendants broad latitude cross-examine informants counseled careful instructions submission jury. Lee 343 747, 757. cumulative impeachment contradicted record. Neither witness called impeach directly were themselves impeached, stressed summation. turned advantage remaining suggesting openness honesty. 698-703. (c) lower courts wrongly resting contention having pleadings Judge. apparently debatable view inapplicable twice Rule's Harris Nelson, 394 286, 294, n. 5; Withrow Williams, 507 680, 696, 7. neither pleaded, considered "an hearing," nor "even argu[ed]" parties. Id., 695. there consent; manifestly, respondent warden prejudiced opportunity claim's resolution. 696. Here, contrast, undisclosed Judge, objection. should aligned purposes grounded. agree applying exhaustion procedural default defenses. Under pre-AEDPA law, inconsistency between Doubtless, why Court's cases 15(b)'s ibid. While AEDPA forbids finding waived absent express waiver State, 28 C. § 2254(b)(3), defenses— default—based conduct, see, Gray Netherland, 518 152, 166. To appealability, prisoner demonstrate reasonable jurists disagree district court's resolution constitutional issues warrant encouragement proceed further. Miller-El Cockrell, 537 322, 327. fits description 703-706. 48 Fed. Appx. 104, remanded. GINSBURG, J., delivered opinion REHNQUIST, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, BREYER, JJ., joined, SCALIA THOMAS, joined Part III. concurring dissenting part, SCALIA, post, p. 706. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT APPEALS FOR FIFTH CIRCUIT. George H. Kendall argued petitioner. With briefs Elaine R. Jones, Janai Miriam Gohara, Clifton L. Holmes. Gena Bunn, Assistant Attorney General respondent. her brief Greg Abbott, General, Barry McBee, First Jay Kimbrough, Edward Marshall Katherine D. Hayes, Attorneys General.* JUSTICE GINSBURG Court. 1 Petitioner Delma Jr., convicted attorney need litigate issues, representing: "[W]e will, motions[,] you entitled." App. 361, 1; Pet. Cert. A4 (both sources' internal quotation marks omitted). Despite undertaking, informant, witness' enforcement officers. 2 Furthermore, red flag untruthfully, never statement indeed, talked officer until few trial. Instead correcting informant's false statements, "ha[d] way," 140, "utmost significance," 146. Similarly, key convey, entirely unrehearsed. appeal collateral review witnesses' their statements 3 Ultimately, through authorized long-suppressed came light. penalty, reversed. latter documented too late wrong forum; therefore qualify We reverse judgment. 4 * April 14, 1980, 16-year-old Richard Whitehead Pocket Park, east Nash, town vicinity Texarkana. 141.1 preliminary autopsy shot times. 10. Bowie County Huff, lead investigator death, company petitioner, 21-year-old evening 11-15, 144; 643 W. 2d 129, 131 (Tex. Crim. 1982) (en banc), cert. denied, 464 904 (1983). 23, confidential reporting "Banks coming meet individual weapon." 15. evening, officers South Dallas, visited residence. Ibid.; Brief 3. Police vehicle en route handgun car, 16. visited, interviewed weapon Tests later identified 17. 5 May 21, hearing, sought concerning Dallas. 21. unresponsive. Any urged, privileged. 23. sustained 24. Several weeks later, July 7, letter, "[the State] motions 6 phase spanned 1980. 2; C3. Witnesses seeing together 11 Whitehead's green Mustang, gunshots Park a.m. 12. 2d, 131. arrived Mustang 8:15 12, stayed 14. 42-43, 47-53. following account visit. morning arrival, blood leg "he [had] got highway 44. night, confessed "kill[ed] boy hell take[n] car come Dallas." 48. During ensuing conversation, noticed "[Banks] pistol." 49. bus. 52-53. next day, abandoned West sold neighbor. 54. shortly question him, revisited 57. 7 times represented 59. "pretrial sessio[n]" appearance 325, ¶ 10, 381-390; Joint Lodging Material 1-36 (transcript preparatory session). "Cook brought absolute truth." 84. 8 addition Corroborating parts account, traveling 34-35. asked "ever money some officers," "give[n] statement." 37-38. answered questions; emphatically promised anything "talked [case]" These answers untrue, correct them. travel search 329; A4, A9. affidavit, explained: 9 "I I [Huff] me charges. That's [Huff]. afraid didn't arrested. . 10 "Willie Delma's pay right away my think altogether $200.00 helping him. He up. after charged murder. "In rob pharmacy drugs needed do really plan give convinced gun." 442-443, ¶¶ 6-8. 12 A6. committed course robbery, violation Tex. Penal Code Ann. 19.03(a)(2) (1974). C3.2 13 penalty ran day. Governed Texas statutory scheme applicable decided answering "special issues." 142-143.3 "If unanimously answer[ed] `yes' each submitted, [would obliged to] defendant death." Penry Lynaugh, 492 302, 310 (1989) (construing Texas' sentencing scheme); Proc. Ann., Arts. 37.071(c)-(e) (Vernon Supp. 1980). was: "Do beyond probability defendant, society?" 143 (internal 14 question, Vetrano Jefferson 104-113. early struck across face threatened kill 104-106. focused once more trip needed, "[w]e [Farr Banks] going pull robberies." 108. "said take "there these burglaries." 109. asked: "How say it?" responded: go specifics, of." 15 remained silent perjuriously testified: "No, not." inquired previously attempted prescription fraud, "up tight that," "testify anybody want[ed] hear." 110. "Can prove Instructed counsel's questions, again said: not. ." 16 themselves. James Kelley attempts fraud; eliciting close relationship girl-friend. 124-129. Later, being drunk while stand. A13. Former Arkansas Gary Owen given information; pending employment private investigator. 129-131. 17 parents acquaintances "respectful, churchgoing young man." A7; 137-139. Thereafter, took affirmed "never felony." 134.4 striking 134-136. 136-137. cross-examination willing "to [Farr] means possible armed case." 137. conceded much. 18 intimated wholly truthful "a man doesn't hundred miles, whatever distance here [Texarkana] person 143. homed robbery: 19 "[Farr] said, `Man, know, what i[f] there's trouble?' And says, `Don't worry I'll it.' speaks itself, know means. submit burden proof, number [propensity acts] yes." 144. 146-147. 20 Urging credibility, attention admission, narcotics. 36, 140. Just use, "open [the jury] way" emphasized, "of utmost significance" showed danger friends strangers, alike." effort ineffective, "Kelley kn[ew] nothing murder," "wish[ed] please future employers." 148. 21 yes special Criminal appeal. 135. implicated here; denied. Ex parte 13568-01 1984); 769 539, 1989). 22 January 13, 1992, questions advanced reiterated petition now us. 150. "upon belief" [Brady 83 (1963)]";5 evidence, "would Mr. set-up." 180, 114 plea, unsigned affidavit girlfriend, sister-in-law Demetra Jefferson, "was well-connected people," consequently managed stay "trouble" illegally drugs. 195, "critical credibility," "generous `deal' [Cook had] cut prosecutors." 2, 114.6 23 reply pleading, October 6, "denie[d] allegation fact [Banks], except supported official records specifically admitted." 234; Tr. Oral Arg. 32. "[N]othing defense," represented. 234. "no Cook," ibid., specific Affidavits accompanied reply. 241-243. affiants "deal, otherwise, they, too, like pleading supported, 24 1993 orders, E1-E9, G1-G7. agreement findings G2. one-page per curiam order, upheld disposition motion. D1. 25 March States Eastern Texas. 248. multiple violations rights. C5-C7. Relevant here, reasserted "reveal[ing] 260, 152 "Cook's enormous [prosecution]." 153; C6-C7.7 June 1998, moved roles played Cook. 262-266, 282-283, 286. superintending limited insufficient justification 294-295. 26 renewed requests 1999. 300-331. proffered back up 322-331. proposing informing 329, 8; supra, 678. Accounting unavailability earlier, less year Oklahoma, then California, police-informant work endangered life. 330-331, 444; 27, preparation "three four sessions" "as [him] to, [he] [his] prison 10-11. 27 4, 1999, issued 340, 346, she "crucial evidence" "two [S]tate's Farr." 345 anticipation ordered Attorney's files. 37-38; 7-8, Evidentiary Hearing (ED Tex.), 30 (hereinafter Hearing). item lodged files, pursuant 74-page interrogation. A10. interrogation, conducted officials prosecutors, occurred representatives closely rehearsed particular, how reconcile earlier subscribed recounting visits ("Your [April 1980] obviously screwed up."); ("[T]he way read that. ."); 32 ("[L]et tell work."); 36 ("That's your [earlier] statement."). Although tutored objection 39; 75-76. 29 Testifying $200 C43. line consistent position, C45; Defense questioned transcript, calling discrepancies 65-68. posthearing proposed conclusions emphasized noting material, assurance receive "all [the] [Banks was] 360-361, 378-379 omitted); 677. 11, 2000, recommendation, C54. "[T]he status, coupled dismal performance punishment phase," concluded, "undermined punishment." C44. Finding remain undisturbed. C46. 31 alter amend ground unresolved fully i. e., rights eve-of-trial 398. observed, reconciled insistence 400, 17; see report. B6; 421-424. Concerning transcript-suppression years became aware 422-423. surfaced newly discovered, document again, objections 423. predicated rehearsal 422. light, reasoned, supplement include basis 15(b), contended, 433.8 sought, question. 433, 436. 33 August 20, 2003, unpublished opinion, judgment A2, judgt. reported 104 (2002).9 observed endeavored App A19-A20. For reason, unwarranted. expressed suppressed, fateful But diligent maintained. view, locate him; similarly, interview involved investigating crime. A19, A22. If efforts unavailing, applied assistance. A19. A22-A23. 34 "materia[l]" A32-A33. A28, A32-A33; 680. Moreover, against A32. Notably, himself addition, effect error ineffectiveness phase. A44. position; ineffective discretely, cumulatively. A46-A47. Finally, regarded A51-A52. accordingly A52, A78. 35 execution date certiorari, presenting issues: tenability claim; ineffective-assistance-of-counsel whether, denied; exclusion minority Swain Alabama, 380 202 (1965). 23-24. 538 917, 977. Appeals' denial claim.10 II note, initially, (AEDPA), 110 Stat. 1214. Turning claims, we B6 (District solely sentence), next, 37 State." 2254(b) (1994 ed.); 509, 520 (1982). involving 180. thus legal claim.11 38 appended Jefferson's hardly probative people." 7; 682. barred, "[would be] [in court] [could] failure." (1992). 39 Brady, reiterate, request faith prosecution." 87. 281-282 (1999), components claim: "The accused, exculpatory, impeaching; willfully inadvertently; ensued." "[C]ause "parallel itself." 282. component (evidence State), coincident (prejudice), accused), genuine A26 (Court recognition "Farr's certainly attacking testimony"). prejudice," same B 40 Our determination informed Strickler.12 case, Virginia prosecutor's files counsel," formal [Brady] motion." 276, (quoting O. T. 98-5864, pp. 212-213 (brackets original)). documents prepared "importan[t]" initial difficulty recalling events 273-275, 290. Those absent-from-the-file witness. 273. unsuccessfully pretrial, Answering superfluous, maintained 278. 41 determined raise 289. Three factors accounted 42 "(a) [State] government." omitted).13 43 C43; 33; cf. 437 (1995) (prosecutors responsible "any others acting government's behalf police"). 283-284 (an policy" factor "explain[s] advance [a Brady] claim"). 44 arrest, answer, assertion. 683. "confirmed" contained. 289; 284 (state counsel, rely representations). short, persisted hiding misleadingly complied full obligations, investigate, connections 45 notable respect. phases repeatedly police; responded 678-680. taking officers, 37; speaking 38, It established "deliberate deception presentation incompatible rudimentary demands justice." 153 (1972) Mooney Holohan, 294 103, 112 (1935) (per curiam) omitted)). representation, assume stoop prospects Berger 295 78, 88 (1935); 284.14 46 presents main them endorsed Appeals. Respondent 15-20; A22-A23; 687-688. conclude none suggests failure, "attempt ascertain true status," "interview undermines cause; agreed. A22; 18-20. "[t]he [of cause] revolves around conduct," particularly resorting 14.15 47 similar Strickler. There, contended examination alongside letter published local newspaper, alerted interviews 284, 26. insubstantial. policy, noted, "it especially unlikely suspected additional withheld." 285. decisions lend notion scavenge hints represents disclosed. "procedural assert mere suspicion misstep may occurred." 286-287. inquiry, turns circumstances "external defense." Amadeo Zant, 486 214, 222 (1988) Murray Carrier, 477 478, 488 (1986)). nevertheless urges, effect, can lie still discover evidence," 35, "potential existence" detected, 36. rule declaring "prosecutor hide, seek," tenable system constitutionally bound process. "Ordinarily, presume public discharged duties." Bracy Gramley, 899, 909 (1997) Chemical Foundation, Inc., 272 14-15 (1926) American truth trials." 281; accord, 439-440; Bagley, 473 667, 675, (1985); Berger, 88. Olmstead 277 438, 484 (1928) (Brandeis, dissenting). Courts, litigants, juries anticipate "obligations [to refrain methods secure conviction] rest[ing] prosecuting attorney, faithfully observed." Prosecutors' dishonest unwarranted attract judicial approbation. 440 ("The prudence discouraged."). 49 variant first. Specifically, argues, accepted, move enabling alleged, prove. 15-16; A19; 1977 Gen. Laws ch. 789, 2(d) (as amended) (instructing "designat[e] resolved," giving discretion "order affidavits, depositions, interrogatories, hearings"). Armed "well-connected 682, little proffer assign overriding significance invoke clear entitlement. 286 ("Proper procedures counsels even them.").16 50 53 (1957), "disclosure identity] automatic," "[c]onsequently, otherwise privileged material." 17-18, linger argument. (or when) Government undercover informer 55-56. privilege obtains "[w]here informer's identity, contents communication, helpful accused." 60-61. Accordingly, though testify, necessary "amplif[ied] contradict[ed] government witnesses." 64. 51 elected Indeed, unquestionably "relevant"; similarly doubt, "helpful [Banks's] Nothing Roviaro, decision examine withholding acknowledgment hope catch make 52 summary, back. representations false; rather, treat submissions truthful. C Unless "material purposes, [its] [does] rise sufficient overcome [a] default." 282 touchstone 419 (1995). instructed 434-435 ("A discounting inculpatory enough convict."); "reasonable result." 434 omitted) (citing 678). 54 oral argument, "paid indictment." 34. commission 7-8; "continue" 147.17 mind "planning robbery," 50.18 55 underscored, 144, 146-147; 681. corroborated." 22-25. What 56 requisite absent, 292-296. Regarding whose cumulative, 292, predicates murder: [armed] 294. Other found, strong conviction excluded entirely: Unlike prosecution, "considerable forensic physical link[ed] defendant] crime" 293. Most tellingly, "did relate petitioner's] eligibility sentence"; closing phase." 295. 57 678, 684. narcotics use. if, "drawn over" previous drug-related activity, hear"; this. 110; supporting vividly contradicts denial: charges." 442, 6. favor, up," 58 informants. "serious credibility" informers pose. 757 (1952). Trott, Words Warning Prosecutors Using Criminals Witnesses, Hastings J. 1381, 1385 (1996) ("Jurors suspect [informants'] motives moment hear frequently disregard highly untrustworthy unreliable. ."). "broad probe cross-examination" "with instructions." Lee, 757; Hoffa 385 293, 311-312 (1966). 1A K. O'Malley, Grenig, & Jury Practice Instructions, 15.02 (5th ed. 2000) (jury Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh Circuits caution assessing testimony). 59 argues "Farr heavily [at trial]," rendering "merely cumulative." 49; 26-28; 709, otherwise. 124-133; 129 (prosecutor noted lacked "personal knowledge trial"). Owen, 141, 148; "that dope, shot," way." 140; 60 sum, confident fair ignorance likely absence understood worthy confidence."). us, plausibly deny result" defense. 678); punishment," C44; 686, satisfied. III 61 rested 422-423; A78; 687, 1-36. leave submissions, 422-423, 432-433; A51-A52; unsuccessfully, Judge; instructs. (setting text 15(b)). position point somewhat obliquely, appears viewed proceedings; concedes, extends "jurists debatable." Compare A52 Slack McDaniel, 529 473, (2000)), 45-46. issued. 62 referenced (1969), "noncontroversial." (1993), petitions. Given circumstances, warden, manifestly afford th[e] resolution." indeed itself 685.19 63 authority equating trial" A52. sort consent" "opportunity Withrow, doubtless ibid.; Harris, 5.20 note unless expressly waives requirement, defenses conduct. 166 (failure lost); Granberry Greer, 481 135 (1987) ("if evident miscarriage justice occurred, appeals nonexhaustion waived"). 64 "demonstrat[e] adequate deserve further." 327 (2003). surely description. 65 66 reasons stated, reversed, remanded opinion. 67 ordered. Notes: Briefs ofamici curiae reversal William G. Broaddus et al. F. Sheehan; John Gibbons Peter Buscemi Brooke Clagett. A. Carlton, Lynn Coleman, Matthew Estes Bar Association amicus curiae. body discovered 15Banks (1982) banc). "A commits offense intentionally attempting kidnapping, burglary, aggravated rape, arson." (1974) forth were: "(1) caused deceased expectation another result; "(2) society; "(3) killing unreasonable provocation, deceased." 37.071(b)(1)-(3) all. 255, 115; C23. "had history alcohol abuse seemed possess self-control suggest particular risk violence."Ibid. 87 (1963), phases; (Banks's acts); ofSwain motions; 6-7, nn. 13568-03 1993) curiam), 13568-06 App.), 990 (2003)). hereinafter refer FarrBrady respectively. 5. provides: "When tried consent parties, shall respects amendment conform party time. Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases Courts provides apply inconsistent [habeas] rules." correctly underLindh Murphy, 521 320, 336-337 (1997), standards 1214, petition. A14-A15. our conclusion render unnecessary address phase; cumulative. underBrady, Napue Illinois, 360 264 (1959), 150 (1972), A29-A32; 259-260. explained, distinct A30; fit umbrella. 679-680, Agurs, 427 97, 103-104 (1976). brief, parties debate issue. 23-25; 21-22, decide adjudication, separately pleaded. Surprisingly, Appeals'per 263 controlling precedent "cause." A15-A33. "whether cause."Strickler, today. expected matter acted capacity. [or] transaction. ."Kemner 589 403, 408 1979) Carmouche 701, 703 1976)); Evid. 508(c)(1) (2003) ("No [for informer] entity."). 443, significance." respond" "Farr-was-an-informant contention" "further investigate[d]." apparent. recounted, seesupra, 683, allegation. rather conceding factual development meritless tribunal. 234, 240. Having opposed. bears reiteration record,id., 115, abuse," indicative "[any] omitted details pistol 104-105; 679-680. elaborated he, incident making "disrespectful comments" girlfriend. 337, 4. recounted "grew angry" objected comments, fight ensue, Jefferson. damaging abetment crime,not own act." (emphasis original); 50. 707-708 (THOMAS, part). highlighted acts, 146-147, facilitation others' 141 ("[Banks] `I thought gun] robberies.' don't believe that."); ("a miles [another] weapon"). addressed commit, harms facilitate: emphasis added). unsurprising (propensity acts) affirmative. 56-73. Examining "instructed. testify."Id., 56. 63-64 ("Texarkana instruct Is today?"). coached, portions Concluding examination, stand, coached. 73-74; 59; occasion 68 whom joins, part. 69 join respectfully dissent II, holds relating nondisclosure accepted investigation, warrants very prejudicial (1995), Brady.1 70 consisted [Banks'] gun," "gave him." 442 (Farr Declaration). contends defense, probability," 434, "beyond [was] society." (the jury) 71 altered finding. horrible meeting victim, Whitehead, misfortune owning wanted, car. proceeded shoot times, head upper fired shots inches Whitehead. showing whim, executed simply 72 form abet aid colloquy makes doing: 73 "Q: You robberies? 74 "A: No, 75 words yours whose, correct? 76 77 understand, 78 Yes." 137 (cross-examination Banks). 79 assist deadly attempt convince posed future: 80 significance. scar face, corroborates supports just went somebody Marcus too." 146 added).2 81 heard violently pistol-whipped brother-in-law week discounted uncover "responsible fight." 33. mix-and-match analysis Strickland Washington, 466 (1984) (rather evaluate independently, potential violations), vastly disproportional brother-in-law's actions. 82 murdered attacked relative murder, robberies providing "means weapon" Even planning robberies,3 likelihood doubt" "[was] randomness wantonness perhaps, standing alone, mandate prejudicial. resolve excuse 11-12 cause. instance, concludes "[t]his [v. (1999)]," ante, 693, general allegations contained But, "`everything government,'" clearly true. 289 (1963)." 180 then, (there is, incidentally, tending payment Farr). Or, (a throughout process), 281 ("[S]trictly speaking, real `Brady violation' produced verdict"). Either way, control, compelling. 84 Ante, 689, affirm briefly discuss ineffective-assistance call, comes nowhere satisfying prong supra. conclusory level abuse, skin condition negatively affected childhood development, slow learner possessed others, pistol-whipping threat, unpersuasive opposite dangerousness issue, 85 err grant enunciated inGiglio since below, addressing certiorari granted. (i) (stating commit[ted] rejecting — grounds that: immaterial sentence"). Admittedly, trying Seeante, 699-700, 18. one. quite discredited aspect knew, Officer dishonest, lied getting altercation doctor prescriptions, cases. "impeached."Ante, 702. best, though, slightly merely slanting hopes hired investigator, 131, doing "friend family," 141.

Category: 0