Summary
The document is a magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation in a state prisoner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas action. It recommends denying Randy Lee Scroggins’s petition, which alleged that the admission of his wife’s subsequently stricken testimony violated the Confrontation Clause and due process, and recommends declining to issue a certificate of appealability.
Holdings
- The state appellate court reasonably rejected Petitioner's Confrontation Clause claim because the trial court struck L.R.'s testimony in its entirety, repeatedly instructed the jury not to consider it, and substantial independent evidence supported the convictions.
- The state court reasonably rejected Petitioner's due-process claim because the stricken testimony and related questioning did not present the exceptional circumstances in which a curative instruction cannot remove prejudice.
- Petitioner was not entitled to federal habeas relief because he failed to show that the state appellate court's decision was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, or was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
- A certificate of appealability should be denied because Petitioner did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
Questions Presented
- Whether the state court's rejection of Petitioner's Confrontation Clause claim was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law where the prosecution elicited testimony from L.R. before she refused to continue, and the trial court then struck the testimony and instructed the jury to disregard it.
- Whether the state court's rejection of Petitioner's due-process claim was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law where the jury heard L.R.'s subsequently stricken testimony and the prosecutor's questions.
- Whether Petitioner made the substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right required for a certificate of appealability.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (32)
- Wilson v. Sellers, 584 U.S. 122 (2018)(followed)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011)(followed)
- Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652 (2004)(followed)
- Mitchell v. Esparza, 540 U.S. 12 (2003)(followed)
- Brown v. Payton, 544 U.S. 133 (2005)(followed)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000)(followed)
- Wood v. Allen, 558 U.S. 290 (2010)(followed)
- Marks v. Davis, 106 F.4th 941 (9th Cir. 2024)(followed)
- Brumfield v. Cain, 576 U.S. 305 (2015)(followed)
- People v. Shipe, 49 Cal. App. 3d 343 (1975)(distinguished)
Showing top 10 of 32.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…