Santifer

Santifer v. Evans

Good Law
312 F. App'x 857
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 19, 2009No. 08-15611California936 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Brandon Lavelle Santifer ("Santi-fer") appeals the state court's exclusion of hearsay testimony, which he claims violated his constitutional rights under Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284, 302 , 93 S.Ct. 1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973). 1 Under Chambers, "the hearsay rule may not be applied mechanistically to defeat the ends of justice" where "constitutional rights directly affecting the ascertainment of guilt are implicated." Id.

Unlike the excluded confession by a third party in Chambers, which "bore persuasive assurances of trustworthiness," id., the excluded testimony here was a statement made by the defendant after he had already taken steps to conceal his involvement in the crime. Santifer's defense at trial was to claim he shot Tra-yell Collins in self-defense because he thought Collins was holding a gun. Santi-fer argues that if his friend Lester Jones had been allowed to testify that Santifer told him, several minutes after the shooting, that Collins had a gun, the jury may have been more inclined to believe that was honestly Santifer's belief. The state trial judge found Santifer's statement to Jones was motivated by his desire to escape punishment,…

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.