Nathan McKinney v. Kevin Chappell
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Nathan McKinney was convicted in California state court of domestic abuse-related charges, including attempted murder. At trial, the State introduced evidence of prior domestic abuse incidents, and the court instructed the jury to credit that evidence for the purpose of finding that McKinney had a disposition to commit similar offenses if it was proven “by a preponderance of the evidence.” In his first amended federal habeas petition, McKinney claims that the “instruction that allowed the jury to draw an inference of criminal propensity from other crimes evidence in a murder trial” violated his rights because it “lower[ed] the burden of proof from guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to ... preponderance of the evidence.” The district court concluded that McKinney’s jury instruction claim was procedurally defaulted. We reverse and remand.
McKinney raised his jury instruction claim in his first state habeas petition, which he filed pro se. In that petition, McKinney argued that “[i]t is ... likely that the jurors used the present incident to find by a preponderance of the evidence that the prior domestic violent incidents took place.” McKinney wrote that such a “result…