Ricky Nolan v. Jack Palmer
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
I.
This case involves two separate and unrelated trials. In the first, a Nevada Jury convicted Petitioner Ricky Nolan of kidnapping and sexual assault, among other crimes. After exhausting his direct appeal, Nolan filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the District of Nevada. The district court denied relief. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (a).
Nolan asserts that the Nevada Supreme Court erred in rejecting his claim that the trial court violated his constitutional rights by admitting hypnotically induced testimony against him. Assuming without deciding that the Nevada Supreme Court committed constitutional error and that the court’s rejection of Nolan’s claim was an unreasonable application of federal Supreme Court precedent, the introduction of the testimony was harmless. Because the victim’s pre-hypnotic statements to law enforcement and the copious forensic evidence duplicated the post-hypnotic testi-monjas content, its admission did not have a “substantial and injurious effect” on the jury’s verdict. See Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 637-38 , 113 S.Ct. 1710 , 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993).