Armenia Cudjo, Jr. v. Robert Ayers, Jr.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Investigation and State Court Trial of Petitioner2

Amelia Prokuda was found dead in her apartment in March of 1986. A pathologist determined the cause of death to be 1 Because we grant relief on this claim, we need not address the other issues raised in Petitioner’s opening brief. See Hurles v. Ryan, 650 F.3d 1301 (9th Cir. 2011). 2 The California Supreme Court’s decision in Cudjo, 863 P.2d at 642, is the last reasoned decision on this issue, so this is the decision to which federal courts owe heightened deference. See Cheney v. Washington, 614 F.3d 987, 995 (9th Cir. 2010). Accordingly, the preliminary facts relevant to this specific issue have been summarized from that state court decision, which are afforded a presumption of correctness that may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1); Hernandez v. Small, 282 F.3d 1132, 1135 n.1 (9th Cir. 2002). 11870 CUDJO v. AYERS multiple blows to the back and sides of the head. Investigating officers found semen present on the victim’s right inner thigh and genital area, but there was no indication of traumatic sex- ual assault. Tests of…

Opinion by Judge N.R. SMITH; Dissent by Judge O’SCANNLAIN.

OPINION

In Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973), the United States Supreme Court clearly established that the exclusion of trustworthy and necessary exculpatory testimony at trial violates a defendant’s due process right to present a defense. This clearly *755 established federal law applied at the time the California Supreme Court decided People v. Cudjo, 6 Cal.4th 585 , 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 390 , 863 P.2d 635 (1993) (en banc) (per curiam), the subject of this habeas appeal. The facts in Chambers are materially indistinguishable from the facts in this appeal. Therefore, the California Supreme Court’s decision was “contrary to ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1), and the error was not harmless. Accordingly, the district court’s denial of Petitioner’s habeas petition is REVERSED, and we REMAND this case to the district court with instructions to issue the writ of habeas corpus as to Petitioner’s conviction.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Investigation and State Court Trial of Petitioner

Amelia…

dissenting:

In the forty years since it was written, Chambers v. Mississippi 410 U.S. 284 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973), “has been used by the Supreme Court only a handful of times to overturn convictions; and the Supreme Court’s standards are quite vague.” Fortini v. Murphy, 257 F.3d 39, 48 (1st Cir.2001). Yet today we hold that Chambers “clearly established] that the exclusion of trustworthy and necessary exculpatory testimony at trial violates a defendant’s due process right to present a defense.” Maj. Op. at 754. Because “the holding of Chambers — if one can be discerned from such a fact-intensive case — is certainly not that a defendant is denied ‘a fair opportunity to defend against the State’s accusations whenever *771 critical evidence’ favorable to him is excluded,” Montana v. Egelhoff, 518 U.S. 37, 53 , 116 S.Ct. 2013 , 135 L.Ed.2d 361 (1996), I respectfully dissent.

I

A

All evidence in this case points to the conclusion that either Armenia Cudjo or his brother Gregory brutally murdered Amelia Prokuda after engaging in (apparently) consensual sexual intercourse. After the murder, evidence against Armenia quickly mounted. Gregory told officers that he had…