Brown

Brown v. Craig Farwell

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 21, 200807-15592California6,636 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2

1 Respondents conceded this point at least twice in the state post- conviction proceedings, both in their written papers and during oral argu- ment. 2 The Nevada Supreme Court ably set forth the facts underlying this appeal. We repeat them here only as necessary. See Brown v. State, 934 P.2d 235, 237-40 (Nev. 1997); see also Sumner v. Mata, 449 U.S. 539, 547 (1981) (stating that federal courts on habeas must presume correct state court finding of facts). 8948 BROWN v. FARWELL A. The Crime

In the early morning of January 29, 1994, Jane Doe,3 a nine-year-old girl, was sexually assaulted in the bedroom of her trailer home in Carlin, Nevada. At the time, Jane was home alone with her four-year-old sister while their mother, Pam, was drinking at a bar and their step-father, Wayne Henle, was working the night shift. Troy was arrested, tried, and convicted for this crime.

Earlier that night, Pam received a phone call from Raquel Brown, who is married to Troy’s brother, Trent, inviting Pam to join her and Trent for a drink at the local bar, CG’s, and asking if Jane could babysit Raquel’s children while they were at the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.