Habeas Granted On Claim That State Withheld Impeachment Evidence

united states, 343 u.s. 747, 757 (1952). indeed, jurors often have a negative either to guilt or to punishment, irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the robinson owed him. robinson met with the victim, a known drug dealer, known of sims' close working relationship with local law enforcement personnel, he since "a defendant is entitled to broad latitude to probe credibility by cross-examination prior to trial, kim sims worked for the sparta police department as a paid suppressed materials would have offered insight into why sims' testimony at trial which to challenge a witness whose credibility has already been shown to be confidence. v. abel, 469 u.s. 45, 52 (1984). bias is "not limited to personal animosity against a "[c]onsiderable authority from the supreme court and our court indicates that a 553 f.3d 1028, 1034 (6th cir. 2009). inquiring about his whereabouts, apparently in an attempt to divert any provided damaging testimony regarding robinson's demeanor after shooting irwin. trying to collect a debt from robinson. it is undisputed that when robinson entered a. standard of review with deloris smith, for the first degree murder of gerald irwin. robinson was convicted and for approximately one year. smith was at the robinson residence to murder of gerald l. irwin in putnam county. during the evening of prosecution." id. thus, in order to comply with brady, "the individual prosecutor has the allegation that the state violated his rights under brady by failing to disclose sims' status robinson was "smiling," which paints robinson as cold and calculating and contradicts for the sixth circuit when sims testified at a preliminary hearing a year before trial, she stated that to impeach [the key witness] because the most damning impeachment nothing to do with the murder and did not know anything about it. the state earlier that evening when he made the statement, "i need a gun." n the victim and, specifically, that he sold drugs to . . . smith and had done so 1 sims' credibility and truthfulness. second, the prosecutor's actual knowledge is argued: john h. bledsoe, office of the attorney general, nashville, enforcement, including the agencies spearheading the investigation of this case. argued: october 8, 2009 pay phone to make phone calls that evening. she was also present at the file name: 10a0014p.06 illinois, 360 u.s. 264, 269 (1959). bagley [materiality analysis] has found constitutional error there is no need for further unconsciously or otherwise, his testimony in favor of or against a party." united states undisclosed evidence may be cumulative, and hence not material." byrd v. collins, 209 feb. 10, 1999) (emphasis added). no physical evidence or testimony, except sims', however, sims testified that robinson was "smiling" after shooting irwin, making david mills, warden, opinion evidence that would likely have altered the outcome of the case. for the reasons set forth c. sims' work as a confidential informant v. bell, 512 f.3d 223, 231 (6th cir. 2008). respondent does not dispute that robinson's and lead tbi investigator in the instant case had no knowledge of her informant application for permission to appeal. counsel b. the underlying crime the floor. the threats by irwin, coupled with robinson's testimony that irwin reached explained: harmless-error review." kyles, 514 u.s. at 435. suppression of this evidence deprived robinson of the opportunity to demonstrate sims' ______________________ evidence showed that robinson resold drugs that he obtained from preliminary hearing, the undisclosed information was different in kind because the the key agent on the case that only one taped interview was conducted was more credible. robinson a conditional writ of habeas corpus, permitting the state of tennessee 120 days , from the date of the order to retry him. the state of tennessee filed a timely notice of 1999). instead, it includes mere "employment or business relationships" with a party been suspicious of sims and cautious about her testimony. such suspicion could have bureau of investigation ("tbi"), both of which spearheaded the investigation in the petitioner-appellee, "a successful brady claim requires a three-part showing: (1) that the evidence claim satisfies the first two prongs of the test. therefore, the key issue for us to resolve smith drove robinson to the old oak tree and they waited for the would be useless. it is more likely that [the defendant] may have failed v. the antiterrorism and effective death penalty act of 1996 ("aedpa"), pub. l. no. attempted to demonstrate that sims' trial testimony differed from her testimony at the a paid state informant. to a material level of importance is inescapable." kyles, 514 u.s. at 437-38. no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 8 "the use of informers . . . may raise serious questions of credibility." on lee v. into the backseat of the victim's car. kim sims was a passenger in the front robinsonsubsequentlyfiledatimelypetitionforstatepost-convictionrelief,alleging initially, sims stated that robinson "just stared" at her after shooting irwin. at trial, behalf in this case, including the police." strickler v. greene, 527 u.s. 263, 281 (1999) undisputed proof established that the victim was armed with a .357 magnum untrustworthiness. on lee, 343 u.s. at 757; accord banks, 540 u.s. at 702. given no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 11 2 that irwin threatened him regarding payment of the $200 debt and that irwin grabbed for (quoting kyles v. whitley, 514 u.s. 419, 437 (1995)) (internal quotation marks omitted). the tennessee court of criminal appeals found that "[a]lthough certain details (6th cir. 2008) (citing strickler, 527 u.s. at 289-90). as the supreme court has further although she did supply the gun, robinson stated that smith had appeal from the united states district court principally by kim sims, the only eyewitness to the crime." robinson, 1999 wl 61062, the state argues that there was no "relationship of mutual profit between sims and the were involved. although certain details were corroborated by a number of 1 evidence is deemed material "only if there is a reasonable probability that, had evidence as well as exculpatory evidence. id. at 280 (citing united states v. bagley, 473 1 robinson testified at the trial and denied having any intent to kill the story. those statements were later recanted and both gave new statements in the driver's seat and pushed the victim's body over so that he could drive of the victim. in her statement, smith denied any involvement in the victim reach for his gun, and although she had been with the victim several very likely redounded to defendant's benefit. under brady v. maryland, the government has a constitutional obligation to evidence would have resulted in a different outcome for the proceeding. ii. discussion sister, debra irwin, later served as a witness at robinson's trial. sims worked as a ci for the "unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the state expressed his desire to meet the victim. the victim suggested that they meet irwin had a pork chop sandwich in his right hand while turning into the parking lot, thus there was no physical or testimonial evidence, except sims', that contradicted sims' trial testimony, however, differed significantly from her testimony at the stating that (1) prior to irwin's death, irwin told rice that he was going to kill someone if he for the reasons stated above, the district court's order granting robinson a 149 f.3d 478, 481 (6th cir. 1998). however, "once a reviewing court applying [the] purchase drugs on the night of january 12, 1995. although she did not because of his death, and further finding that even if admissible, the contrary testimony by for the middle district of tennessee at cookeville. and sims concocted a "story" regarding their activities that evening. the no. 09-5243 f.3d 486, 518 (6th cir. 2000) (quoting united states v. avellino, 136 f.3d 249, 257 (2d actions, i.e., whether the withheld impeachment evidence is "material" to robinson's i. background courts did not address this issue. the tennessee court of criminal appeals affirmed the trial also worked as a ci for the putnam county sheriff's office ("pcso") and the tennessee court's denial of post-conviction relief and the tennessee supreme court denied robinson's buy from wade mcclure, who also later served as a witness at robinson's trial. the district established federal law," 28 u.s.c. § 2254(d)(1), or that the state court relied on an around. as the victim turned his car, robinson shot him in the back of the which was visible in the front seat of his car. respondent-appellant. we conclude that withholding the impeachment evidence regarding sims was bagley's touchstone of materiality is a "reasonable probability" of a and he shot the victim because the victim pointed a gun at him while in the they drove on interstate 40 to the smithville exit where robinson unreliable . . . ." stephen s. trott, words of warning for prosecutors using criminals preliminary hearing. at trial, sims stated that when irwin turned into the parking lot, he under the aedpa, robinson may obtain relief only if he can demonstrate that the state it makes little sense to argue that because [the defendant] tried to the parties failed to develop the allegation of sims' status as a paid informant and the state as a paid state informant. in an order filed january 26, 2009, the district court granted she did not see what happened at the critical moment when robinson shot irwin and had court's decision was "contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly a duty to learn of any favorable evidence known to the others acting on the government's lawyers attempted to impeach sims at trial, questioning her about her drug addiction and trial. as the ninth circuit has noted: 1769, 1783 (2009) (quoting kyles, 514 u.s. at 435). application for permission to appeal. in question be favorable; (2) that the state suppressed the relevant evidence, either for writ of habeas corpus. among the claims set forth in robinson's amended petition was no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 4 received an automatic sentence of life imprisonment. the tennessee court of criminal a different light as to undermine confidence in the verdict.'" cone v. bell, 129 s. ct. victim. he claimed that he shot the victim in self-defense. robinson said appeals affirmed the conviction and the tennessee supreme court denied robinson's moment and did not know if irwin reached for his gun. yet, at trial sims testified that ________________________ the state argues that the undisclosed impeachment information would have been cir. 1998)). we are not swayed by the prosecution's argument. although robinson evidence known to the others acting on the government's behalf . . . , including the nonetheless, robinson's lawyers were not was bent down in the front seat trying to pick up her cigarette case, which had fallen on no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 7 which spearheaded the robinson/irwin investigation. as a matter of fact, sims worked only informed on behalf of the state in unrelated cases and that the special prosecutor authorities." yet, sims worked for the sparta police department as a ci on at least nine state v. robinson, no. 01c01-9609-cr-00412, 1999 wl 61062, at *1-2 (tenn. crim. app. finally, robinson called the victim and said that he had the money and whether the cases were unrelated, sims had a working relationship with law suspicion. _________________ predisposition toward informants. "ordinary decent people are predisposed to dislike, robinson home when the victim called and suggested the meeting at the oak distrust, and frequently despise criminals who `sell out' and become prosecution purposefully or inadvertently; (3) and that the state's actions resulted in prejudice." bell the jury's critique of sims' truthfulness and reliability. as this court has observed, victim to arrive. robinson was in possession of a small handgun that smith defendant suffers prejudice from the withholding of favorable impeachment evidence as the victim approached, robinson exited the vehicle and informed of sims' activity as a ci or that sims had informed against two of the state's confidential informant ("ci"). on february 17, 1995, about a month after irwin was shot, deloressmith'stiesto local lawenforcement. making it unlikely that irwin reached for the gun as robinson claimed. sims also no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 6 no. 04-00067--william j. haynes, jr., district judge. - in summary, the suppressed evidence of sims' status as a ci is material under a premeditated, deliberate intent to kill irwin. evidence favorable to an accused . . . violates due process where the evidence is material multiple claims of constitutional error. specifically, robinson claimed, inter alia, that the preliminary hearing. u.s. 667, 676 (1985)); hawkins v. coyle, 547 f.3d 540, 556 (6th cir. 2008). "the jury's - to be looking for the victim and asking others about his whereabouts, witness in testifying falsely that a defendant's life or liberty may depend." napue v. iii. conclusion pursuant to 28 u.s.c. § 2254, seeking to set aside his first degree murder conviction and c. holley, federal public defender's office, nashville, tennessee, for did not receive his money that night; (2) rice was present when irwin called robinson on conditional writ of habeas corpus is affirmed. nashville, tennessee, for appellee. on brief: john h. bledsoe, office of the d. sims' trial testimony _________________ decision to grant or deny habeas relief and review its factual findings for clear error. sparta police department on at least seven other occasions and was paid each time. sims the tennessee court of criminal appeals made the following factual findings: recommended for full-text publication preliminary hearing, sims stated that she did not see what happened at the crucial the suppressed evidence could have also supported the assertion that at the time with the pcso and tbi a mere eighteen days before robinson's trial began, making a b. analysis victim's wallet, cellular phone, pager, money, and some drugs. he and sims attorney appointed a special prosecutor from another district because of robinson and different result, and the adjective is important. the question is not appeal and this court stayed the district court's judgment pending appeal. on two occasions that night, but denied having the money to pay the debt. the state also argues that although sims was a ci for the local authorities, she impeach [the key witness] and failed, any further impeachment evidence no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 5 corpus. no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 2 no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 3 no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 9 the only eyewitness to the crime. sims testified that she did not see the the trial court denied robinson's petition, finding rice's affidavit inadmissible could have introduced information regarding sims' ci status to the jury as evidence of brady because sims was the state's star witness and only her testimony contradicted or on january 13, 1995, robinson was indicted in putnam county, tennessee, along her lack of credibility and the possibility of bias in her testimony. a defendant has the constitutional right to impeach a witness by showing bias. and they frequently disregard their testimony altogether as highly untrustworthy and order granting petitioner david lee robinson, jr. a conditional writ of habeas corpus - activities. we find both arguments unconvincing. first, the facts show that sims davis v. alaska, 415 u.s. 308, 316-17 (1974). if a defendant is denied this right, then clay,circuitjudge. respondent,davidmills,warden,appealsthedistrictcourt's outcome of the case and the determination of robinson's guilt or innocence hinged on january 12, 1995 and early morning hours of january 13, the victim contradicted robinson's assertion that he shot irwin in self-defense. whether the defendant would more likely than not have received a anthony v. dewitt, 295 f.3d 554, 560 (6th cir. 2002). david l. robinson, 1 from robinson. in conjunction with that, smith had driven robinson to a that the victim had threatened him and his family over the course of the night him. differed from her testimony at the preliminary hearing. moreover, robinson could have evidence in fact was withheld by the government. occasions between the time of irwin's death and robinson's trial, earning money each tree. smith agreed to take robinson there. pursuant to sixth circuit rule 206 enforcement officials corroborated robinson's testimony that hewas fearful and to have the issues submitted to the jury with careful instructions," the state's _________________ got into the smith vehicle and they returned to cookeville. robinson, smith, - relationship between a party and a witness which might lead the witness to slant, his assertion that shooting irwin was self-defense rather than premeditation. robinson's before: ryan, cole, and clay, circuit judges. were corroborated by a number of other witnesses, the state's theory was established at the "old oak tree" in cookeville. likewise in an effort to divert suspicion from her. both sims and smith gave a. procedural history kyles, 514 u.s. at 434. therefore, "favorable evidence is subject to constitutionally guilt or possible punishment. 373 u.s. at 87. "[s]uppression by the prosecution of robinson/irwin case. on january 25, 1996--eighteen days before robinson's trial witnesses. jurors suspect their motives from the moment they hear about them in a case, the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been theorized, however, that robinson and smith planned the murder and both commenced--sims aided a putnamcounty detective and a tbi agent in making a controlled of guilt or innocence, and it is upon such subtle factors as the possible interest of the questionable or who is subject to extensive attack by reason of other evidence, the to law enforcement officials. day following the shooting, robinson called the victim's friends and family court proceeding," 28 u.s.c. § 2254(d)(2). we review de novo a district court's controlled buy from wade mcclure who, like sims, later served as a witness at contacted . . . robinson several times about the payment of a $200 debt that automatic life sentence. following the appointment of counsel, he filed an amended petition robinson was entitled to present such evidence to the jury in order to call into question 668, 701-02 (2004) (favorably citing trott, words of warning, supra). accordingly, no. 09-5243 robinson v. mills page 10 mandated disclosure when it `could reasonably be taken to put the whole case in such of trial, sims was biased in favor of the local authorities. the term "bias" describes "the the discrepancies between sims' testimony at the preliminary hearing and her testimony decided and filed: january 28, 2010 the prosecutor's duty to disclose under brady encompasses impeachment in conflict with robinson's, impeachment of sims by the defense was crucial to the the telephone and asked about money owed to him; and (3) kim sims, the state's star head. robinson then told kim sims to move to the backseat. robinson got at [her]" after shooting irwin and said that he had to kill irwin or irwin would have killed referencing the disparities between her trial testimony and her testimony at the according to sims' testimony, she spent part of the day pretending furnish a criminal defendant with any exculpatory evidence related to the defendant's robinson's father was employed by the pcso and smith's husband was a former task force a new trial must be granted, except if the error was harmless. united states v. stavroff, at *2. since sims' testimony was the basis of the state's theory and the only testimony attorney general, nashville, tennessee, for appellant. henry a. martin, michael robinson seem cold and calculating, and thus undermining his assertion of self-defense. and "is always relevant in assessing a witness's credibility." id. - state, in violation of brady v. maryland, 373 u.s. 83 (1963), withheld impeachment as witnesses, 47 hastings l.j. 1381, 1385 (1996); see also banks v. dretke, 540 u.s. estimate of the truthfulness and reliability of a given witness may well be determinative tennessee, for appellant. henry a. martin, federal public defender's office, pursuant to 28 u.s.c. § 2254. the district court granted the writ based on a finding that the hours that night, she never heard him threaten robinson. witness, was present when all such threats were made. robinson also alleged that sims was police." strickler, 527 u.s. at 281 (quoting kyles, 514 u.s. at 437) (internal quotation at trial. "[w]here the undisclosed evidence merely furnishes an additional basis on know the details, smith was aware that someone was trying to collect money in the outcome." bagley, 473 u.s. at 682; accord johnson v. bell, 525 f.3d 466, 475 seat. the victim drove a short distance and pulled into a parking lot to turn different verdict with the evidence, but whether in its absence he received the car. as robinson drove the victim's vehicle past smith's vehicle, he - when the prosecution's case hinges on the testimony of one witness." harris v. lafler, pulled off and parked the victim's car on tucker ridge road. he took the told smith to drive around and then come back and get him. robinson got no idea whether irwin reached for his gun. sims also stated that robinson "just stared the undisclosed evidence would have been helpful to demonstrate bias by sims. used the information to demonstrate that sims had a pro-prosecution bias at the time of _________________ - irwin's vehicle, irwin had his .357 magnumconspicuouslydisplayed. robinsontestified assisted authorities as a ci and, in exchange, was paid for her services. regardless of sims was an informant against irwin's sister and was paid $70 for her cooperation. irwin's merely cumulative because sims had already been impeached by the jury's attention to > 1. the importance of sims' testimony different. a `reasonable probability' is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in her statement to the police, smith said that she had given robinson the gun x on august 16, 2004, robinson filed a timely petition for writ of habeas corpus, [petitioner and deloris smith] were indicted for the first degree robinson's trial. jury conviction when viewed in light of the other evidence presented at trial. did so slowly and with a pork chop sandwich in his right hand, thus making it unlikely united states v. serv. deli inc., 151 f.3d 938, 944 (9th cir. 1998). a fair trial, understood as a trial resulting in a verdict worthy of irrelevant because "the individual prosecutor has a duty to learn of any favorable that irwin grabbed his gun with his right hand. she also stated that after shooting irwin, car.2 had provided.1 2. sims' confidential informant status time for her cooperation. she also worked as a ci for the pcso and the tbi, both of material under brady because there is a reasonable probability that disclosure of the motioned for her to follow him. murder, but admitted giving the weapon to robinson. smith did not testify at trial, but her second statement to law officer. juries' negative predisposition regarding informants, the trial jury would likely have undermined robinson's assertion that he killed irwin in self-defense. had robinson under brady is the third prong--whether petitioner was prejudiced by the state's 104-132, 110 stat. 1214. see evans v. hudson, 575 f.3d 560, 564 (6th cir. 2009). defendant or pecuniary gain." schledwitz v. united states, 169 f.3d 1003, 1015 (6th cir. other witnesses, the state's theory was established principally by kim sims, for his gun, make robinson's self-defense theory plausible; such facts do not constitute state failed to disclose its agents' second interview of james rice, who provided an affidavit robinson's assertion of self-defense. the victim was a known drug dealer who was sims, however, told a much different story before the trial court. during the witnesses--debra irwin and wade mcclure. appellee. herein, we affirm the district court's grant of the petition for a conditional writ of habeas because robinson filed his habeas petition in 2004, the petition is governed by his gun while pulling into the parking lot. sims admits that at the critical moment, she united states court of appeals this obligation, its "responsibility for failing todiscloseknown,favorableevidencerising marks omitted). moreover, regardless of whether the prosecution succeeds in meeting statements to law enforcement officials that corroborated the concocted