Michael Malone v. Tom Felker

MEMORANDUM

Appellant appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. Appellant argues that the prosecutor violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), by not disclosing a telephone message he received, claiming defense witness “Orbus Weathers was a bad guy and not to be trusted.” We review the denial of the petition de novo. Lambert v. Blodgett, 393 F.3d 943, 964 (9th Cir.2004). We affirm.

Here, the California Superior Court’s decision was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court precedent. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d). “There are three components of a true Brady violation: The evidence at issue must be favorable to the accused, either because it is exculpatory, or because it is impeaching; that evidence must have been suppressed by the State, either willfully or inadvertently; and prejudice must have ensued.” Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 281-82 , 119 S.Ct. 1936 , 144 L.Ed.2d 286 (1999). The state court’s holding that the telephone message was not favorable to the accused was not unreasonable. See Brady, 373 U.S. at 87 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 . Under Brady , the…