Raymond F. Riley v. George Deeds

Good Law
56 F.3d 1117·95 Daily Journal DAR 7235·1995 WL 332203·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 13693·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4185
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 6, 199594-15231California2,693 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

During jury deliberations in appellant Raymond F. Riley’s state court trial for sexual assault and first-degree kidnapping, the jury asked the court to read back part of the trial testimony. The trial judge was not available to respond to the request. In his absence, and without any input from the judge, the jury was assembled in the courtroom with the defendant Riley, his lawyer, and the prosecuting attorney present. The judge’s law clerk presided. At the jury’s request, only the victim’s direct testimony was read. Thereafter, the jury returned its verdict, convicting Riley of the charges against him.

After exhausting his state court remedies, Riley filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . The district court denied the petition. Riley appeals.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we reverse. We hold that the state trial judge’s failure to rule on whether the victim’s direct examination should have been read back, coupled with his absence and unavailability during the readbaek proceeding, resulted in structural error that rendered Riley’s trial fundamentally unfair and deprived him of due process under 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.