George

George v. Giurbino

Good Law
130 F. App'x 183
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 6, 2005No. 03-56822California1,543 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Warden G.J. Giurbino (hereinafter “the State”) appeals the district court’s grant of habeas relief to prisoner Byron Glen George. After a 1998 jury trial in California Superior Court, George was convicted on five counts (attempted murder, kidnapping for carjacking, carjacking, assault with a deadly weapon, and felon in possession) and was sentenced to two concurrent life terms. His convictions were based largely on the videotaped conditional examination — both direct and cross — -of the victim, Edwin Recinto, who by the time of trial had left California for his native Philippines.

George’s contention that admission of the videotaped conditional exam violated his Confrontation Clause rights was rejected by the state trial and appellate courts, and was denied review in the state supreme court. State habeas relief was likewise unavailing. In September 2003, the district court granted habeas relief on the ground that the state court decision to admit the videotaped testimony was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

We review de novo the district court’s grant of habeas relief. Leavitt v. Arave, 371 F.3d 663, 668 (9th Cir.), amended by 383…

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.