Wooten

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Direct Appeal

Wooten appealed his conviction for felony murder to the California Court of Appeal. In his opening brief, Wooten, who was represented by counsel, argued that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of other crimes, failing to dis- close evidence relating to third-party culpability, not issuing a jury instruction on third-party culpability, and because there was insufficient evidence to establish that a robbery occurred. Wooten also claimed cumulative error.1 The California Court 1 Cumulative error occurs when “ ‘although no single trial error exam- ined in isolation is sufficiently prejudicial to warrant reversal, the cumula- tive effect of multiple errors [has] still prejudice[d] a defendant.’ ” Whelchel v. Washington, 232 F.3d 1197, 1212 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting United States v. Frederick, 78 F.3d 1370, 1381 (9th Cir. 1996)). 11660 WOOTEN v. KIRKLAND of Appeal denied Wooten’s cumulative error claim, affirmed Wooten’s conviction and sentence, and modified the judg- ment to reflect that the murder was committed during an attempted robbery.

Wooten then filed for review in the California Supreme Court. In…