United States v. Robert Darryl War Club
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Robert War Club appeals his conviction, after a four-day jury trial, for the first-degree murder of Richard Green in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111 (a), 1151, and 1153(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We conclude that by limiting cross-examination of Green’s brother, the district court precluded War Club from developing evidence that Green’s brother had a motive to commit the murder. The court thereby deprived War Club of the “meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense” guaranteed by the Constitution. Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319, 324 , 126 S.Ct. 1727 , 164 L.Ed.2d 503 (2006) (quoting Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683, 690 , 106 S.Ct. 2142 , 90 L.Ed.2d 636 (1986)). Because we cannot say that the error was “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt,” United States v. Boulware, 384 F.3d 794, 808 (9th Cir.2004) (quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967)), we vacate the conviction and remand for a new trial.
At trial, War Club presented the theory that Richard Comes Last committed the murder at the direction of Green’s brother. To support this defense theory, War Club established that Comes Last was…