Cesar Sarausad v. Carol Porter, Cesar Sarausad v. Carol Porter

Opinion by Judge William A. Fletcher; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Reinhardt; Dissent by Judge Bybee

Petitioner Cesar Sarausad brings a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , challenging his second-degree murder and two attempted second-degree murder convictions. We hold that the evi *674 dence was sufficient to support the convictions under Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). However, based on In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358 , 90 S.Ct. 1068 , 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970), Sandstrom v. Montana, 442 U.S. 510 , 99 S.Ct. 2450 , 61 L.Ed.2d 39 (1979), and Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 , 112 S.Ct. 475 , 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991), we hold that ambiguous jury instructions on accomplice liability, in combination with other factors, unconstitutionally relieved the State of its burden of proof of an element of the crimes with which Sarausad was charged.

I. General Background

Sarausad is a naturalized citizen who immigrated as a child from the Philippines. At the time of the events in question, Sarausad was a 19-year-old student at the University of Washington in Seattle. He had recently graduated from Ingraham High School in…

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I

I concur in the majority holding that the ambiguous jury instruction on accomplice liability, when viewed in the context of the entire trial, unconstitutionally relieved the State of its burden of proof. I therefore join the decision to affirm the district court’s grant of habeas relief on that ground.

I dissent, however, from the majority’s conclusion that the incredibly “thin” evidence the State presented at trial, maj. op. at 692-93, was sufficient to support Sarau-sad’s convictions under Jackson v. Virgi *695 nia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), and AEDPA. In fact, the evidence isn’t thin. It’s non-existent. The state court relied heavily on its determination that Sarausad heard a conversation about a plan to shoot the victim. Yet, there is absolutely no evidence in the record that he did. The majority itself points out that there was “no direct evidence” and “limited circumstantial evidence” of Sarausad’s guilt. Maj. op. at 692-93. Unlike the majority, I would take the next step — a step compelled by its own description of the evidence. I would hold, with the district court, that the evidence against…

dissenting.

This case comes to us through an unusual set of proceedings. After Washington courts denied direct review of Sarausad’s appeal from his conviction, the Washington Supreme Court issued a “clarifying instruction” in State v. Roberts, 142 Wash.2d 471 , 14 P.3d 713 (2000), which was relevant to Sarausad’s appeal. Sarausad v. State, 109 Wash.App. 824, 829 , 39 P.3d 308, 311 (2001). In Sarausad’s second appeal, brought through a personal restraint petition, the Washington Court of Appeals “reexamine[d] the record in light of Roberts,” and confessed that in its prior opinion it “erred.” Id. at 830, 837, 39 P.3d at 312, 315 . On reconsideration, in a lengthy opinion, the Washington Court of Appeals held that the jury instructions given in *704 Sarausad’s case “complied with Roberts and the Washington accomplice liability statute.” Id. at 838, 39 P.3d at 316 . The Washington Supreme Court, adopting a Commissioner’s ruling citing Roberts , found that “the trial court correctly instructed the jury” on accomplice liability.

Notwithstanding the care with which the Washington courts reconsidered Sarau-sad’s claims in light of this clarification in Washington law, the majority…

479 F.3d 671 Cesar SARAUSAD, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Carol PORTER, Respondent-Appellant. Cesar Sarausad, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Carol Porter, Respondent-Appellant. No. 05-35062. No. 05-35192. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted November 15, 2005. Filed March 7, 2007. John J. Samson, Office of the Washington Attorney General, Olympia, WA, for the respondent-appellant. Patricia S. Novotny, and David B. Zuckerman, Seattle, WA, for the petitioner-appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington John C. Coughenour, Chief Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-02-02547-JCC. Before REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge William A. Fletcher; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Reinhardt; Dissent by Judge Bybee WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge. 1 Petitioner Cesar Sarausad brings a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , challenging his second-degree murder and two attempted second-degree murder convictions. We hold that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions under Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).…