Watkins v. Rubenstein

The district court concluded that the state habeas court had unreasonably applied the principles of Brady v. Maryland. The district court granted petitioner's habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. 2254, finding that the prosecuting attorney had admitted to petitioner's defense counsel that the victim of petitioner's attempted robbery crime told the prosecuting attorney before trial that he, the victim, had not been put in fear by petitioner on the date of the crime, an element essential to conviction under West Virginia law, and that the prosecuting attorney had failed to so inform petitioner. The court agreed with the State's appeal, contending that the district court impermissibly found new facts and erred in failing to give the appropriate deference to the state habeas court’s factual findings and conclusions of law made with respect to its adjudication of petitioners’ Brady claim. Accordingly, the court reversed the judgment. View "Watkins v. Rubenstein" on Justia Law