Court Opinion

ID: 9869188
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 19:20:31.490677+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:59.536093
License: Public Domain

KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit . Judge,
concurring in the judgment.
Habeas courts may not grant relief unless “there is no possibility fairminded jurists could disagree that the state court’s decision conflicts with [Supreme Court] precedents.” Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 102, 131 S.Ct. 770, 178 L.Ed.2d 624 (2011). Although fair-minded jurists could possibly characterize the prosecutor’s statements as reasonable inferences that the various bullet components matched up, equally fair-minded jurists could more logically characterize the prosecutor’s statements as misstatements of the evidence, which was inconclusive on this point. Under these circumstances, applying Richter and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), I concur in the judgment affirming the denial of habeas relief.