Yeung

Yeung v. Finn

Good Law
160 F. App'x 568
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 19, 2005No. 05-15156California712 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Bruce Yeung, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Although the prosecution breached its duty to the Petitioner by failing to disclose the prosecution’s telephone conversation with Elsa’s civil attorney, this breach does not arise to a Brady violation because the withheld information was not material. Evidence is material “if there is a reasonable probability that, had the evidence been disclosed to the defense, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 280 , 119 S.Ct. 1936 , 144 L.Ed.2d 286 (1999) (citation omitted). Here, the prosecution presented at least five independent sources of evidence that would not have been impeached by Elsa’s alleged financial bias in convicting Petitioner: (1) Price’s testimony describing Elsa’s screams that prompted him to call 911; (2) Elsa’s screams heard over the phone by the 911 dispatcher; (3) multiple police officers’ testimony that Elsa was lying on the pavement with her pants down, crying hysterically when the officers arrived at the scene;…

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.