Steven G. Slutzker in No. 03-4219 v. Philip Johnson Gerald J. Pappert Stephen A. Zappala, Jr., District Attorney, Allegheny County, Pa, in No. 03-4046

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence was material where four eyewitnesses identified the defendant, but one of them was more “credible” than the others, and the Brady evidence was that she previously told police that the defendant was not the perpetrator
• explaining that state prisoners typically must fully “exhaust their claims in state court before seeking relief from the federal courts” (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A)
• noting that the “raison d’etre for the [procedural default] doctrine lies in the fact that a state judgment based on procedural default rests on independent and adequate state grounds.”
• noting that the determination of whether the prejudice prong has been satisfied for the procedural default of a Brady claim “is identical to the analysis of materiality under Brady itself.”
• noting that the determination of whether the prejudice prong has been satisfied for the procedural default of a Brady claim “is identical to the analysis of materiality under Brady itself.”
• impeachment evidence was material where the witness- had previously identified another individual as the culprit even though the witness had been impeached by prior statements in which she failed to identify defendant as the culprit

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).