Anton E. Barker v. Gary Fleming

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a seven-page order from the Washington Supreme Court denying review of a PRP was the last reasoned state court decision
• holding that when “the last reasoned decision adopted or substantially incorporated the reasoning from a previous decision,” it is “reasonable for the reviewing court to look at both decisions to fully ascertain the reasoning of the last decision”
• holding that suppressed convictions were cumulative impeachment evidence in light of other evidence showing that the witness had a “penchant for lying,” had been in and out of jail several times, and had made a deal with the state on three other crimes
• explaining the “Supreme Court’s requirement that the materiality of the withheld evidence be analyzed cumulatively ... not item by item” (citing Kyles, 514 U.S. at 436,115 S.Ct. 1555)
• finding no materiality where undisclosed impeachment evidence 26 “was not the glue holding together the prosecution’s case” and “heaped-on impeachment 27 evidence” would not have altered the witness’s “already shattered credibility”
• finding a decision contrary to federal law when “[d]espite the clarity of the Supreme Court’s directive that a materiality analysis include an assessment of the cumulative effect of undisclosed evidence, the Washington Supreme Court did not conduct such an analysis”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).