Socha v. Richardson

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his murder conviction on ground that prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence that could have been used to impeach govt. witness at defendant’s trial. While said evidence from witness’ cellmate, who opined that witness lied “a lot of times” and demonstrated lack of remorse over death of victim, conflicted with witness’ testimony, such that said evidence should have been turned over to defendant, state court’s conclusion that said impeachment evidence would not have changed outcome of defendant’s trial was not so unreasonable so as to warrant new trial, where: (1) other witnesses provided sufficient evidence of defendant’s guilt on charged offense; (2) record contained other impeachment evidence pertaining to said witness; and (3) withheld evidence also contained inculpatory evidence that would have been harmful to defendant.