Brady v. Pfister

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his murder conviction on grounds that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call four witnesses to corroborate defendant’s claim that shooting of his girlfriend was accidental. Although state appellate court gave wrong reason for denying defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim, where said court stated that defendant could not establish that outcome of his trial would have been altered given fact that defendant had close relationship with his proffered witnesses, other strong evidence of defendant’s guilt in record, including defendant’s flight from state after shooting, precluded defendant from establishing prejudice where proffered testimonies were only marginally exculpatory.