Silva

I. BACKGROUND

Silva’s case is before us for the second time. On our first consideration of the case, we remanded for the district court to determine whether there was Brady error: was there a deal such as Silva alleged; if so, did the prosecutor conceal it; and if he did, were the deal and its concealment material under Brady? Silva v. Woodford, 279 F.3d 825, 855 (9th Cir. 2002) (“Silva I”). The district court found that there was a deal and that it was not disclosed, but found that these facts were immaterial to Silva’s conviction. It is this judgment that Silva now appeals.

As the facts and procedural background are amply summa- rized in our prior disposition, we excerpt from that summary as relevant to the issues before us here and add additional details as necessary.

Silva stands convicted of the gruesome abduction, robbery and murder of [Kevin] Thorpe in Madeline, California. Thorpe and his girlfriend, Laura Craig, 8620 SILVA v. BROWN were college students returning from winter break when they passed through Madeline on their way to Oregon. On January 11, 1981, Silva and two accom- plices, Joe Shelton and Norman Thomas, kidnaped Thorpe and Craig after…