WPC] agZc-&^}78c2/=-0Vt|uxԭTCJ3vvq#r?rKm%"Y[~@ѧA୊ i0$_{s?/u&^H.v,&uI6]YYA@WLJߐCĐ-ZLK p[繋0~ l)5EbLwW$PbFoDັ]+# 0i# 0a$ 0C% 0%& 0' 0' 0( 0) 02W* 0* 0:+ 0qY+ 0_, 0 w, 0- 0/ B* 1 D/31 D+b1 01U63 D/3 03 064 04 0:6 0^>6 0<6UD>6U*7  @7 ``7 7 77 8 h8`9 b: r: :^ : h:; << < =*= ,= <=R= T=j= l=|=w~> h>> ??@AB CDD4E hFxF zGGH IIJKLMN OO hO 5PGPIQ KR]R h_R RR SS S T  T mT h4T TT UU UU UU V W  W W4W4W h6W W WW hW *X@X BX TXjX lX ~X~X jXXY Z[ \(\ *\@\B\fD]aF]U.Z] &]] 0YN]HP5N_LATERAL,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,*+ (_2623  ..*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` *2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h *)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   *&+& (_18   x 23  .. x   *AA (_17  5+ ` hp x 523  Ԁ5+ ` hp x 5  *GG (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ/%` ` hp x /   *88 (_15  ," hp x ,23  Ԁ," hp x ,  *55 (_14 ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ) hp x ) ` *22 (_13  &hhp x &23  Ԁ&hhp x &  *// (_12  #p x #23  Ԁ#p x #  *,, (_11 h  p x 23  Ԁ p x h *)) (_10  pp x 23  Ԁpp x   (&& &_9   x 23  Ԁ x   (AA &_8  5+ ` hp x 523  5+ ` hp x 5  (GG &_7   /%` ` hp x /23  /%` ` hp x /   (88 &_6  ," hp x ,23  ," hp x ,  (55 &_5 ` ) hp x )23  ) hp x ) ` (22 &_4  &hhp x &23  &hhp x &  (// &_3  #p x #23  #p x #  (,, &_2 h  p x 23   p x h ()) &_1  pp x 23  pp x   &&& $_   x 23   x   0AA.Normal  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition T  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  <AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(hh&H1  5+ ` hp x 5      5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H2  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H3  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H4  5+ ` hp x 5 XXX 5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H5  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  (]]&H6  5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 5  2DD0Address  5+ ` hp x 55+ ` hp x 5  8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEK8<6X9`(Courier NewKS@\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard K8<6X9`(Courier NewKS@\  `&Times New RomanS <:Preformatted  /%  ,Kk %#/K8<6X9`(Courier NewKS@\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/  <:zBottom of 75(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?A%2A`Arial?  S@\  `&Times New RomanS76(X75+ ` hp x 5  &  d d4)1dxd'dxd<:zTop of For79(X7    5+ ` hp x 5?A%2A`Arial?  S@\  `&Times New RomanS76(X75+ ` hp x 5  <6X9`(Courier New4)2dxd0KS.SampleK8<6X9`(Courier NewKS@\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterK8<6X9`(Courier NewKS@\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  \  `&Times New Roman%2A`ArialTopOfDocumentciteas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488 (S.D.Fla.))SDU_1DO;OPhttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=WLD%2DPEOPLECITE&DocName=0231075301&FindType=h&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=FlorStarPageciteas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *1 (S.D.Fla.))http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_SDU_2SDU_3SDU_4N- citeas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *2 (S.D.Fla.))http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1970140963&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_topFN;B0011http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1970140963&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_topFN;F0011SDU_5FN;B0022FN;F0022SDU_6http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000006&DocName=FLSTS921%2E141&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&Fciteas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *3 (S.D.Fla.))http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1986119530&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_topSDU_7http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1986119530&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1986253640&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000006&DocName=FLSTRCRPR3%2E850&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Floridahttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1990132170&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_topSDU_8http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?SerialNum=1990132170&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1992055113&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_top) -PEciteas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *4 (S.D.Fla.))http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_SDU_9http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_SDU_10http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1963125353&FindType=Y&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_tophttp://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1985133735&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=675&AP=http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1995091643&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=437&AP=http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1999142645&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=281&AP=SDU_113|xciteas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *5 (S.D.Fla.))SDU_12http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1995091643&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=434&AP=http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000006&DocName=FLSTRCRPR3%2E850&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=FloridaSDU_13 citeas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *6 (S.D.Fla.))SDU_14http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1986119530&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=582&AP=FN;B0033FN;F0033SDU_15Uciteas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *7 (S.D.Fla.))SDU_16http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=350&SerialNum=1990073591&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=903&AP=FN;B0044FN;F0044SDU_17http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1972127068&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=154&AP=FN;B0055SDU_18FN;F0055citeas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *8 (S.D.Fla.))SDU_19SDU_20citeas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *9 (S.D.Fla.))FN;B0066SDU_21FN;F0066SDU_22SDU_23citeas((Cite as: 2002 WL 31102488, *10 (S.D.Fla.))http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=735&SerialNum=1990132170&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=761&AP=http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=780&SerialNum=1995091643&FindType=Y&ReferencePositionType=S&ReferencePosition=436&AP=SDU_24http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_FN;B0077FN;F0077http://web2.westlaw.com/Find/Default.wl?DB=1000546&DocName=28USCAS2254&FindType=L&AP=&RS=WLW2.79&VR=2.0&SV=Split&MT=Florida&FN=_Table_A $GeorgiaBottomOfDocument($     !USUS.,  _SS SDXX@DD#@XX@Dh#@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X #@XXXX % B #XXX@Xp#%B% C %C% D %D?+ ` hp x X?@XXXX15Fla.L.WeeklyFed.D563 ? Є_F.Supp_.2d +  LaurenceH.TribeCambridge,MA,BarryP.WilsonBoston,MA,JamesC._Lohman_ԄNew  Orleans,LA,forPetitioner.   RobertJ._Krauss_,Carol_Ditmar_ԄAssistantAttorneyGeneral,Tampa,forRespondents.   % E #XXX@XY#%Eb@XXXX@DX@X#D@D#@DD    ?+ ` hp x X?  S Y  0  #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXORDER 0݌  Y Ќ XX   @DX@X#D@D#@DD    ?+ ` hp x X?  S H    #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX 4F    5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  X#@XX@Df##XXX@X#@XXXX_ROETTGER_6+   7  \@DX@X#D@DY #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@X< #@XXXX,DistrictCourtJ.   % G @DX@X#D@D #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@X8 #@XXXX*1%G @DX@X#D@D #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@X #@XXXX% H @DX@X#D@Dv #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@X #@XXXXԀ%H @DX@X#D@DI #@DD#@XX@Dz ##XXX@X #@XXXXTHISCAUSEisbeforetheCourtuponapetitionforawritofhabeascorpuspursuantto4I t!   5  @DX@X#D@D!#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@X(#@XXXX28 w  U.S.C.@DX@X#D@D#@DD/  /  #@XX@D#@DX@X#D@D=#@DD_/  /  #@XX@D##XXX@X:#@XXXX22546   7 . @DX@X#D@D'#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX.PetitionerisWilliamH.Kelley(Kelley),andRespondentisHarrySingletary, g  SecretaryoftheDepartmentof% J @DX@X#D@DK#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X<#@XXXX%J@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXCorrectionsfortheStateofFlorida(State).ThisCourtpreviously W  enteredapartialorderonAugust31,2000denyingclaims4,5,and6ofthepetition.TheCourt C reservedrulingonthefirstthreeclaimsasKelleyhadrequestedtopresentmoreevidenceinan / evidentiaryhearing.TheCourtheldanevidentiaryhearinginBoston,MassachusettsonApril24 k 25,2001andinFt.Pierce,FloridaonJuly9,2001.FinalbriefswerefiledwiththeCourtanda W finalargumentwasheldonNovember7,2001inFt.Lauderdale,Florida. ݌ C Ќ X   @DX@X#D@Dx#@DD    ?+ ` hp x X?  S2   #@XX@Dm##XXX@X#@XXXXFACTS W݌  Ќ XX   @DX@X#D@D#@DD    ?+ ` hp x X?  Sg   #@XX@DE##XXX@X#@XXXXIrene_Maxcy_ԀandJohnSweetwerelovers,andtheyplannedtokillIrene'shusband,Charlesvon g _Maxcy_,awealthycitrus_grover_Ԁandrancherfrom_Sebring_,Florida.SweetandIrenetalkedfor S monthsaboutthemurder,afterwhichtheyplannedtolivetogetheron_Maxcy_'slargeestate. ? Sweetcontactedanacquaintance,WilliamBennettofBoston,Massachusetts.Arrangements + weremade,andapricewasset:$5000upfront,and$15,000afterthemurder.  OnOctober1,1966,SweetwenttoDaytona,FloridatomeetAndrewvon_Etter_.Von_Etter_Ԁwasto  dothekilling,alongwithapartner.Thenextdayvon_Etter_ԀcalledSweettotellhimthepartner,  "WilliamKelley",hadarrived.OnOctober3rdSweetdrovevon_Etter_Ԁand"Kelley"totheestate.   TheallegedkillersshowedSweettheweaponstheywoulduse,knivesandarevolver,whichthey w! keptinasatchel.Sweetdrovebackto_Sebring_.Charlesvon_Maxcy_Ԁwasmurderedthatday.A c" coupleweekslater,SweetwenttoBostontopaythe$15,000balancedue% K @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D!##XXX@X "#@XXXX%K!@DX@X#D@Dp"#@DD#@XX@D"##XXX@X"#@XXXXforthemurder. O# Unfortunately,themurderdidnotsignalthebeginningofablissfullifeontheestateforIrene ;$ _Maxcy_ԀandJohnSweet.Sweetwantedmoremoney,purportedlytopayoffthemurderbalance, '%w  andhebegantoharassandthreatenIreneandherfiveyearolddaughterdaily.Terrified,Irene &c!! _Maxcy_Ԁwenttotheauthorities.Inexchangeforimmunity,sheimplicatedSweetinthemurder &O"" forhirescheme.Sweetwasarrestedin1967,chargedwithfirstdegreemurder.Itbecameknown ';## inthecourseoftheinvestigationforSweet'strialthatthe"triggermen"inthemurderwerenamed ('$$ von_Etter_Ԁand"Kelley".Thesemenwerenotchargedatthistime,however,asprosecutorsfelt )%% theyhadinsufficientevidenceagainstthem. *%& Irene_Maxcy_ԀwasthestarwitnessfortheprosecutioninSweet'sfirsttrial.Hertestimonywas +&' erraticanddifficultasshedenied,evenundertheprotectionofimmunity,thatshewantedtokill ,'( herhusband.ShetestifieditwasentirelySweet'sidea.Sheclaimedtohavewitnessedmanyof s-() _thephonecallsSweethadmadeinarrangingthemurder,andsherelatedmanyofthedetails  aboutwhichSweethadkeptherinformed,includingthemurderitself.Shefurthertestifiedthat  shegaveSweetmorethan$35,000tohelppayforthemurder,andthatSweethadwanted  another$75,000.Sweet,testifyingonhisownbehalf,deniedanyinvolvementinthecrime.The t trialendedinahungjury.Sweetwastriedagainin1968.Again,IreneMaxcytestifiedagainst ` him,and% L @DX@X#D@DG##@DD#@XX@D0+##XXX@Xr+#@XXXX%L#+@DX@X#D@D+#@DD#@XX@D,##XXX@XI,#@XXXXagain,Sweetdeniedanyinvolvement.Thistimethejuryagreedonaguiltyverdict. L  @DX@X#D@D,#@DD#@XX@D6-##XXX@Xx-#@XXXX*2@DX@X#D@D-#@DD#@XX@D-##XXX@X@.#@XXXX% N @DX@X#D@D.#@DD#@XX@D.##XXX@X/#@XXXXԀ%N.@DX@X#D@Dx/#@DD#@XX@D/##XXX@X/#@XXXXTheSecondDistrictCourtofAppealofFloridareversedSweet'sconviction.4O   5  @DX@X#D@DP0#@DD/  #@XX@D 1##XXX@XL1#@XXXXSweetv.State,@DX@X#D@D1#@DDp/@  /  #@XX@D2##XXX@XU2#@XXXX 8  235So.2d40(Fla.2dD.C.A.1970)600@   71@DX@X#D@DE3#@DD#@XX@D3##XXX@X54#@XXXX.Thecourtofappealheldthatthetrialcourterredinnot $ t admittingIreneMaxcy'stestimonythatshehadbeenhavingaromanticrelationshipwiththecase  d agent.Thecaseagentdeniedhavingthisrelationship.Buttheseconflictingaccounts,in  P  conjunctionwiththeunseemlinessoftherelationshiptobeginwith,werefoundtounderminethe  <  credibilityofbothIreneMaxcyandthecaseagent.% P @DX@X#D@D4#@DD#@XX@D6##XXX@X6#@XXXX%P6@DX@X#D@DI7#@DD#@XX@Dy7##XXX@X7#@XXXX4Q~   5  @DX@X#D@D 8#@DD/  #@XX@D8##XXX@X8#@XXXXԀ[FN1]6?8S8@   78@DX@X#D@Df9#@DD#@XX@D9##XXX@X':#@XXXXԀAsthistestimonyformedthevital (  foundationofthecase,thecourtofappeal,onejudgedissenting,orderedareversal.#XXX@X:#@XXXXSee4R:    5  #XXX@X`;#/  @XXXXid.#XXX@X&<#2/2@  /  @XXXXԀat42.6;;@   7 #;#XXX@X<#@XXXX    /݌̌ XX   @DX@X#D@D=#@DD , ,X+ ,, ,,<+ ` hp x <  SJ G +>  #@XX@D>##XXX@XQ>#@XXXX% S @DX@X#D@D?#@DD#@XX@D?##XXX@X@#@XXXX%S?@DX@X#D@Dg@#@DD#@XX@D@##XXX@X@#@XXXX4T   5  @DX@X#D@D>A#@DD/  #@XX@DA##XXX@XA#@XXXXFN1.6]AqA   7XzA@DX@X#D@DB#@DD#@XX@DC##XXX@XCC#@XXXXԀIreneMaxcywasindeedconvictedofperjuryin1971inconnectionwithher J  testimonyintheSweettrial.Shewassentencedtolifeimprisonment,butservedonlyfour : andonehalfyearsbeforebeingreleasedonparole.+>/?݌ &v Ќ ,, ,,X  @DX@X#D@DC#@DD , ,  <+ ` hp x <  Se E  #@XX@D#@XXXX. l Kelleyfiledhispostconvictionreliefmotiontovacatethejudgmentandsentencepursuantto  \ 4b԰   5  #XXX@X#/  @XXXXrule3.850oftheFloridaRulesofCriminalProcedure6L`#   7@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X߄#@XXXXԀintheTenthJudicialCircuitofFlorida H inNovember,1987.AfterahearingthecourtdeniedthemotioninAugust,1988;Kelley 8 appealedthedenial,againtotheSupremeCourtofFlorida.@DX@X#D@DD#@DD#@XX@DH##XXX@X#@XXXXSee4c   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@Dd##XXX@X#@XXXXKelleyv.State,@DX@X#D@D<#@DD/#  /  #@XX@Dk##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ569So.2d754  $ (Fla.1990)6)#   7 Z@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@DC##XXX@X#@XXXX.Ashisfirstpointofcollateralrelief,Kelleyrepeatedhisargumentthatthedestruction ! ofevidenceimpairedhisdueprocessrights.Thecourtrejectedthisclaimonmuchthesame " groundsasitdidondirectappeal.Thecourtdeniedtwootherclaims:thepurportedimproper #  contactbytheprosecutionofawitnessandanimproperclosingargument,asprocedurally $! barred.Further,Kelleyarguedmoreextensivelythattherewere@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XL#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D؍##XXX@X#@XXXXԀviolations,andaverred% d @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@Dǎ##XXX@X #@XXXX%d@DX@X#D@Dn#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXa x% " detailedlistofsupposedinstancesofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.TheSupremeCourtof d&!# Floridadeferredentirelytothetrialcourt'sorderonalloftheseclaims,andconcludedtherewas P'"$ neithera@DX@X#D@DE#@DD#@XX@Dp##XXX@X#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D>##XXX@X#@XXXXԀviolation,norineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Kelley'sotherclaimsofjuror <(#% misconduct,anderrorinthetrialjudge'sdecisionnottorecusehimselffromthecase,were ()x$& likewisefoundunavailing.@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X<#@XXXXSee4et   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@XX#@XXXXid.@DX@X#D@D#@DD/)#  /  #@XX@D##XXX@XR#@XXXXԀat75562.6ǔ۔#   7 @DX@X#D@DB#@DD#@XX@DƗ##XXX@X#@XXXXԀTheSupremeCourtofFloridaaffirmedthetrial *d%' court'sdenialofKelley'smotiontovacatethejudgmentandsentenceonSeptember6,1990. +T&( KelleyfiledapetitionofhabeascorpusintheSupremeCourtofFloridainApril,1991.Kelley +@') raisedanotherclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,thistimedirectedathisappellate ,,(* counsel.KelleyfurtherattackedtheconstitutionalityofapplyingFlorida'sdeathpenaltystatuteto -)+ thiscaseon@DX@X#D@Dm#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXexpostfacto@DX@X#D@DZ#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@Xț#@XXXXԀgrounds,andchallengedtheaggravatingfactorsfoundinthiscaseas  "overbroad."TheSupremeCourtofFloridadeniedKelley'spetitiononMarch12,1992.4f    5  @DX@X#D@D0#@DD/  #@XX@DP##XXX@X#@XXXXKelley  v.Dugger,@DX@X#D@D+#@DD/Ζ#  /  #@XX@Do##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ597So.2d262(Fla.1992)6#   7`F@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D3##XXX@Xu#@XXXX. iej݌  ЌX   @DX@X#D@Dڠ#@DD    <+ ` hp x <  Sn ɡ  #@XX@D\##XXX@X#@XXXXFEDERALHABEASCORPUSPETITION ɡC݌ n ЌX   @DX@X#D@D#@DD    <+ ` hp x <  S ]    #@XX@DG##XXX@X#@XXXX@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX*4@DX@X#D@DY#@DD#@XX@Dz##XXX@X#@XXXX% h @DX@X#D@D!#@DD#@XX@DM##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ%h@@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D%##XXX@Xg#@XXXXKelleyfiledtheinstantpetitionforhabeascorpusinthiscourt,pursuantto4i@   5  @DX@X#D@Ḑ#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@X˨#@XXXX28U.S.C.@DX@X#D@Da#@DD/-  /  #@XX@D#@DX@X#D@D̩#@DD/E  /  #@XX@D##XXX@Xݪ#@XXXX22546:N   7@"@DX@X#D@Dʫ#@DD#@XX@DG##XXX@X#@XXXX,   onOctober9,1992.Kelleyallegessixclaims.Thefirstpresentsprosecutorialmisconduct,   includingsuppressionofexculpatoryevidence,andmakingfalsestatementstothejury.Claim   twoallegesineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,asdefensecounselfailedto% j @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D^##XXX@X#@XXXX%jQ@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D5##XXX@Xw#@XXXXinvestigatethecase, x  deposewitnesses,andperformotherbasicfunctions.Third,Kelleyclaimsthedestructionof d  evidenceviolatedhisconstitutionalrights.Claims4,5,and6weredeniedbythisCourton P  August31,2000. .݌ <  ЌX   @DX@X#D@Dܯ#@DD    <+ ` hp x <  S {    #@XX@Dy##XXX@X#@XXXXTHEAEDPA `݌   ЌX   @DX@X#D@DŲ#@DD    <+ ` hp x <  S` ]    #@XX@DO##XXX@X#@XXXXOnepreliminarymatterinvolvesthelawwhichthiscourtshouldapplytoKelley'spetition.The `  habeascorpusstatuteunderwhichKelleyfiledthisactionunderwentsignificantchangesin1996, L  pursuanttotheAntiterrorismandEffectiveDeathPenaltyAct(AEDPA).Substantively,the 8 amended4k@   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  /V  /  #@XX@Di#@DX@X#D@D#@DD/U  /  #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX22546.   7@ _@DX@X#D@Dڸ#@DD#@XX@DW##XXX@X#@XXXXԀprovidesformuchgreaterdeferencetothestatecourtadjudicationofclaims, $t andfurtherrefinesthepresumptionofcorrectnessfederalcourtsmustaccordfactual d determinationsinstatecourt.@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XL#@XXXXSee@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@Dֻ##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ4l@8   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@X1#@XXXX28U.S.C.@DX@X#D@Dǽ#@DD#/f  /  #@XX@D#@DX@X#D@D2#@DDh/  /  #@XX@D##XXX@XC#@XXXX2254(d),(e)6   7@@DX@X#D@D0#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX.WithregardstoKelley'spetition,the P UnitedStatesSupremeCourthasheldthatingeneral,exceptforselectprovisionsthatCongress @ explicitlymaderetroactive,theamendmentsapplyonlytocasesfiledaftertheeffectivedateof , theamendedstatute.@DX@X#D@D\#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXSeeLindhv.Murphy,@DX@X#D@Db#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ531U.S.320,32637(1997).AsKelley'spetitionwas  filedin1992,anddoesnotconcerntheselectretroactiveprovisions,thiscourtmustapplythe  lawasitwaspriortothe1996amendments. 6݌  ЌX   @DX@X#D@D?#@DD    <+ ` hp x <  S2/   #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXANALYSIS ݌ 2 ЌX   @DX@X#D@D#@DD    <+ ` hp x <  Sq   #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXPursuanttotheSupremeCourt'srulingin@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@XW#@XXXXLindh,@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X&#@XXXXԀthiscourtmustanalyzeKelley'sclaimunderthe  preAEDPAstandardofreviewforhabeaspetitions.% m @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D3##XXX@Xu#@XXXX%m&@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XL#@XXXXUndertheoldlaw,apetitionforawritof  habeascorpuscannotbegrantedunlessKelleycanestablishthatheisbeingheldinviolationof   theUnitedStatesConstitutionorthelawsortreatiesoftheUnitedStates.4n   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D"##XXX@Xd#@XXXX28U.S.C.@DX@X#D@D#@DDy/   /  #@XX@D##@DX@X#D@De#@DD/   /  #@XX@D4##XXX@Xv#@XXXX2254(a)6    7$"@DX@X#D@Dc#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X%#@XXXX. ! Inhispetitionforwritofhabeascorpus,Kelleyclaimsa@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X<#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X #@XXXXԀviolation.4o   5  @DX@X#D@Dr#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@X.#@XXXXBradyv.Maryland,@DX@X#D@D#@DD/   /  #@XX@D##XXX@X:#@XXXX x" 373U.S.83(1963)6    7 @DX@X#D@D*#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X #@XXXX.Becausea@DX@X#D@Dq#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@DF#@DD#@XX@Dj##XXX@X#@XXXXԀclaimisinfactadueprocessclaim,itisclearthatthis d# Courtisempoweredundertheappropriatecircumstancestograntfederalhabeascorpusrelief"on T$ thegroundthat[thepetitioner]isincustodyinviolationoftheConstitution...oftheUnited @%  States."4pB   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@X #@XXXX28U.S.C.@DX@X#D@D#@DDs/   /  #@XX@D#@DX@X#D@D #@DD@/   /  #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX2254(a)6x    7 @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX.The@DX@X#D@D/#@DD#@XX@DT##XXX@X#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D"##XXX@Xd#@XXXXԀruledoesnotrequireaprosecutorto"deliverhisentire ,&|!  filetodefensecounsel,"butonlytodisclosethoseitemswhicharematerialtothedefendant's 'l"! guiltorpunishment.4q2    5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@XU#@XXXXUnitedStatesv.Bagley,@DX@X#D@D#@DDQ/   /  #@XX@D%##XXX@Xg#@XXXXԀ473U.S.667,675,(1985)6    7* @DX@X#D@DW#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X,#@XXXX;accord,e.g.,4r   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@XQ#@XXXXKylesv. (X#" Whitley,@DX@X#D@D#@DD/   /  #@XX@D.##XXX@Xp#@XXXXԀ514U.S.419,437(1995)6    7@DX@X#D@D`#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X4#@XXXXԀ("WehaveneverheldthattheConstitutiondemandsanopen (H$# filepolicy.") )8%$ "Therearethreecomponentsofatrue@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@DR##XXX@X#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@Xb#@XXXXԀviolation:[1]Theevidenceatissuemustbe *$&% favorabletotheaccused,eitherbecauseitisexculpatory,orbecauseitisimpeaching;[2]that +'& evidencemusthavebeensuppressedbytheState,eitherwillfullyorinadvertently;and[3] ,'' prejudicemusthaveensued."4s   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D}##XXX@X#@XXXXStricklerv.Greene,@DX@X#D@DX#@DD/   /  #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ527U.S.263,28182(1999)6.B    7xs@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@DR##XXX@X#@XXXX.Thesecond -(( component(suppression)isnotatissueinthiscase,sincetheStatedoesnotdisputethatthe  evidenceinquestionwasnotproducedtoKelley'scounselbefore% t @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X=#@XXXX%t@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXtrial.Theremainingtwoissues  dependonwhethertheundisclosedinformationwasmaterialandexculpatory.  @DX@X#D@Dy#@DD#@XX@D-##XXX@Xo#@XXXX*5@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X7#@XXXX% v @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X #@XXXXԀ%v@DX@X#D@Do#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXTheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasemphasizedfouraspectsofmaterialityin@DX@X#D@DG#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXKylesv. t Whitley.@DX@X#D@D^#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXԀFirst, ` [a]lthoughtheconstitutionaldutyistriggeredbythepotentialimpactoffavorablebut L  undisclosedevidence,ashowingofmaterialitydoesnotrequiredemonstrationbya 8  preponderancethatdisclosureofthesuppressedevidencewouldhaveresultedultimatelyinthe $ t defendant'sacquittal(whetherbasedonthepresenceofreasonabledoubtoracceptanceofan  ` explanationforthecrimethatdoesnotinculpatethedefendant)....@DX@X#D@DL#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXBagley's@DX@X#D@D1#@DD#@XX@DX##XXX@X#@XXXXԀtouchstoneof  L  materialityisa"reasonableprobability"ofadifferentresult,andtheadjectiveisimportant.The  8  questionisnotwhetherthedefendantwouldmorelikelythannothavereceivedadifferent $  verdictwiththeevidence,butwhetherinitsabsencehereceivedafairtrial,understoodasatrial   resultinginaverdictworthyofconfidence.A"reasonableprobability"ofadifferentresultis   accordinglyshownwhenthegovernment'sevidentiarysuppression"underminesconfidencein   theoutcomeofthetrial."....   Thesecondaspectof@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXBagley@DX@X#D@D}#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXԀmaterialitybearingemphasishereisthatitisnotasufficiencyof p evidencetest.Adefendantneednotdemonstratethatafterdiscountingtheinculpatoryevidence \ inlightoftheundisclosedevidence,therewouldnothavebeenenoughlefttoconvict.The H possibilityof% w @DX@X#D@DL#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX%w@DX@X#D@Dl#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXanacquittalonacriminalchargedoesnotimplyaninsufficientevidentiarybasisto 4 convict.Onedoesnotshowa@DX@X#D@DC#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X+#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXԀviolationbydemonstratingthatsomeoftheinculpatory  p evidenceshouldhavebeenexcluded,butbyshowingthatthefavorableevidencecould  \ reasonablybetakentoputthewholecaseinsuchadifferentlightastoundermineconfidencein H theverdict.[footnoteomitted].... 4 Third...onceareviewingcourtapplying@DX@X#D@Da#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XR #@XXXXBagley@DX@X#D@D #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@X! #@XXXXԀhasfoundconstitutionalerrorthereisnoneed   forfurtherharmlesserrorreview....   Thefourthandfinalaspectof@DX@X#D@D #@DD#@XX@DH ##XXX@X #@XXXXBagley@DX@X#D@D #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XY #@XXXXԀmaterialitytobestressedhereisitsdefinitionintermsof  suppressedevidenceconsideredcollectively,notitembyitem.[footnoteomitted].  4xn   5  @DX@X#D@D #@DD/  #@XX@D ##XXX@X-#@XXXXKylesv.Whitley,@DX@X#D@D#@DD/Ias  /  #@XX@D##XXX@X8#@XXXXԀ514U.S.at434366  as   7n: @DX@X#D@D(#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXԀ(mostcitationsandfootnotesomitted).  ItisagainstthislegalbackdropthatKelley'strialmustbeviewed.Petitionermadehis@DX@X#D@D[#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@XT#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X"#@XXXX p violationclaimsatthestatelevelbothinaNovember1987motionforpostconvictionrelief \  under4yn   5  @DX@X#D@D#@DD/  #@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXXRule3.850oftheFloridaRulesofCriminalProcedure66Jas   7n{@DX@X#D@D]#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XM#@XXXXԀandagainwiththeFlorida H! SupremeCourt.TheFloridaSupremeCourt,quotingthetrialcourt'sorder,issuedoneparagraph 8"  explanationsforeachexculpatoryandimpeachmentevidencethatthestatefailedtoturnoverto $#t! thedefense.Therefore,therecordbeforethisCourtcontainsonlythetrialcourt'sreasoning, $`" analysis,findingsoffact,% z @DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X#@XXXX%zz@DX@X#D@D.#@DD#@XX@D^##XXX@X#@XXXXandlegalbasesforthedenialofKelley's@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@DO##XXX@X#@XXXXBrady@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D##XXX@X_#@XXXXԀviolationclaim. $L # Thetrialcourt,quotedbytheFloridaSupremeCourt,"brieflysummarized"eachpieceof %8!$ evidenceforitslikelyindividualeffectontheoutcomeofthetrial,butdidnotanalyzethe &$"% evidencecollectively.Thispiecemealapproachiscontrarytotheprogenyof@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D:##XXX@X|#@XXXXBrady.@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XK#@XXXXԀTherefore, '#& thiscourtmustindependentlyconsiderthemeritsofKelley'sclaims.@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D8##XXX@Xz#@XXXXKyles,supra.@DX@X#D@D#@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@XP #@XXXX (#' @DX@X#D@D #@DD#@XX@D ##XXX@X/!#@XXXX*6@DX@X#D@D!#@DD#@XX@D!##XXX@X!#@XXXX% | @DX@X#D@D\"#@DD#@XX@D"##XXX@X"#@XXXXԀ%|{"@DX@X#D@D/##@DD#@XX@D`###XXX@X##@XXXXKelleyclaimstheStateofFloridadepriveddefensecounselofvaluableimpeachment )$( evidencebysuppressingevidenceofSweet'strueimmunitydeal,thetranscriptofJohnSweet's *%) firsttrial,apolicereportwhichrecordedKayeCarter's(themotelclerk)inabilitytopositively p+&* identifyapictureofKelleyshortlyafterthemurder,andalatentfingerprintreport.Kelleymade \,'+ numerouspretrialrequestsforsuchmaterials,includingdetailedmotions,legalmemoranda,and H-(, substantialcorrespondence.TheseundisclosedexculpatorymaterialswerenotprovidedtoKelley  priortohistrialandwereonlyfurnishedduringhispostconviction3.850proceedings,pursuant  tohisrequestforprosecutionandinvestigativefilesunderFlorida's"PublicRecordsAct,"  Chapter119,Fla.Stat.Kelley'strialattorneyswerenotawareoftheexistenceofthesematerial t exculpatorydocumentsandrecordsuntiltheywereturnedoverbytheprosecutionatthe3.850hearing. ` In@DX@X#D@D$#@DD#@XX@D(##XXX@X(#@XXXXKelleyv.StateofFlorida,@DX@X#D@D`)#@DD#@XX@D)##XXX@X)#@XXXXԀJusticeAdkinsoftheFloridaSupremeCourtwrote"wewishto L  emphasize,however,thatifeventheslightesthintof% } @DX@X#D@DD*#@DD#@XX@D*##XXX@X<+#@XXXX%}*@DX@X#D@D+#@DD#@XX@D+##XXX@X,#@XXXXprosecutorialmisconductwaspresentinthe 8  casetheresultmightwellbedifferent."4~X*   5  @DX@X#D@Dx,#@DD/  #@XX@DP-##XXX@X-#@XXXXKelleyv.State,@DX@X#D@D+.#@DDq/X  /  #@XX@DZ.##XXX@X.#@XXXXԀ486So.2dat5826--X   7XF-@DX@X#D@D/#@DD#@XX@D0##XXX@XX0#@XXXX.Thiscasepresents $ t manyincidencesofprosecutorialmisconduct.HardyPickard,AssistantStateAttorney,hasa  d habitoffailingtoturnoverexculpatoryandimpeachmentevidence.%  #XXX@X0#%14X   5  /  @XXXXԀ[FN3]61 2X   7X>2#XXX@Xy2#@XXXX  P   g݌̌X   @DX@X#D@D3#@DD , ,+ ,, ,,<+ ` hp x <  S / +34  #@XX@D3##XXX@X3#@XXXX%  @DX@X#D@D 5#@DD#@XX@DL5##XXX@X5#@XXXX%?5@DX@X#D@D5#@DD#@XX@D#6##XXX@Xe6#@XXXX4X   5  @DX@X#D@D6#@DD/  #@XX@D87##XXX@Xz7#@XXXXFN3.666X   7Xz.7@DX@X#D@D8#@DD#@XX@D8##XXX@X8#@XXXXԀInanothercapitalmurdercase,CircuitJudgeBarbaraFleischer,sittingby   designationbytheFloridaSupremeCourtasatemporaryjudgeoftheTenthCircuit, r  orderedanewtrialforadefendantbecauseAssistantStateAttorneyHardyPickard ^  withheldimpeachmentmaterialsfromthedefense.@DX@X#D@D49#@DD#@XX@D:##XXX@X:#@XXXXStateofFloridav.Melendez,@DX@X#D@D^;#@DD#@XX@D;##XXX@X;#@XXXXԀNo:CF J  841016A2XX(TenthJudicialCircuitofFlorida),slipop.,filedDecember5,2001.+344݌ 6 Ќ ,, ,,X  @DX@X#D@DD<#@DD , ,  <+ ` hp x <  Su =  #@XX@DF=##XXX@X=#@XXXX  AkeypieceofevidencewithheldfromKelleybyAssistantStateAttorneyPickardwas  informationconcerningSweet'sMassachusettsimmunityagreement.TheStatewithheldtwo  documentsthatprovedSweethadadealforimmunityonnumerousseriousfeloniesin x MassachusettswhichwereinextricablyconnectedtoSweet'simplicationofKelleyinthemurder d ofMaxcy.ThefirstsuppresseddocumentrevealedthatSweetwasnotawardedimmunityfrom P MassachusettsuntilMarch13,1981afteranofftherecorddebriefingofSweetandnegotiations < withMassachusettsofficialsconcerningtheMaxcymurderandnumerous%  @DX@X#D@D>#@DD#@XX@DA##XXX@XB#@XXXX%A@DX@X#D@DB#@DD#@XX@DB##XXX@XB#@XXXXMassachusettscrimes. (x (OrderofImmunitydatedMarch13,1981). d Inaddition,theStateandPickardfailedtodisclosetodefensecounselAgentJoeMitchell's P FloridaDepartmentofLawEnforcementInvestigativeReportdatedFebruary21,1981.This < reportwaswithheldfromKelleyuntilyearsafterhistrial.Thedocumentdescribesameetingon ( March6,1981atPickard'sofficeinBartow,Florida.Thedocumentdescribesthesequenceof   eventsandthedescriptionsoftheinterstatemeetingsanddiscussionswithSweetandhis ! attorneys.Inthereport,"MajorReganhadindicatedthatSweetwaswillingtotestifyinbehalfof " theStateofFlorida,providinghecouldbegrantedimmunityinthe1966case."(Florida #  DepartmentofLawEnforcement,InvestigativeReportdatedFebruary21,1981,p.1).The t$! documentisimportantbecausewhatiscontainedinthedocumentisvastlyatoddswiththe `% " state'srepresentationduringthetrial.DuringtheState'sclosingargument,Pickardarguedtothe L&!# jurythatSweetdidnothavetogiveKelleytotheauthoritiesinordertogetimmunity.However, 8'"$ itisclearfromthewithheldreportthatSweetwaswillingtotestify@DX@X#D@DYC#@DD#@XX@D I##XXX@XLI#@XXXXif@DX@X#D@DI#@DD#@XX@DI##XXX@XJ#@XXXXԀhecouldbegranted $(t#% immunity.(Emphasissupplied). )`$& @DX@X#D@DJ#@DD#@XX@DJ##XXX@X=K#@XXXX*7@DX@X#D@DK#@DD#@XX@DK##XXX@XL#@XXXX%  @DX@X#D@DjL#@DD#@XX@DL##XXX@XL#@XXXXԀ%L@DX@X#D@D=M#@DD#@XX@DnM##XXX@XM#@XXXXAsinKelley'sfirstmurdertrial,thematerialityofSweet'sdealisevidentbecausethejuryin )L%' thesecondtrialsentthetrialcourtthefollowingquestionduringitsdeliberation: *8&( AstheJury,wewouldliketoknowifJohnJ.SweetreceivedimmunityinFloridaforthefirst +$') degreemurderandperjurybeforehegaveinformationon%  @DX@X#D@DN#@DD#@XX@DO##XXX@XP#@XXXX%O@DX@X#D@DuP#@DD#@XX@DP##XXX@XP#@XXXXtheMaxcytrial,andifhehadanything ,(* togainbyhistestimony.(ExcerptfromKelley'ssecondtrialtranscript,p.925). -(+ Clearly,thejurywasvitallyinterestedinSweet'smotivationfortestifyingashedid.IfSweethad  nothingtogainfromhistestimony,histestimonywouldbemorecredible.Ontheotherhand,if  Sweetdidhaveanythingtogainbyhistestimony,histestimonywouldbemoresuspect.  Ifcounselhadbeenprovidedacopyofthereport,counselwouldhavebeenplacedinabetter t situationtocrossexamineSweet.@DX@X#D@DLQ#@DD#@XX@DS##XXX@X@T#@XXXXSee4   5  @DX@X#D@DT#@DD/  #@XX@DU##XXX@X\U#@XXXXStanov.Dugger,@DX@X#D@DU#@DD.//%  /  #@XX@D!V##XXX@XcV#@XXXXԀ901F.2d898,903(11thCir.1990)6TT%   7V!U@DX@X#D@DSW#@DD#@XX@DW##XXX@X0X#@XXXX(en ` banc)(notingthatthedefendant'sburdentoprovethematerialityofsuppressedimpeachment P  evidencewaslightenedinviewofthefactthatapreviousjuryhadbeenunabletofindthe <  defendantguilty).Worsestill,duringthejury'sdeliberationstheprosecutor,Pickard,tothis ( x questionarguedsuccessfullytothetrialjudgethathenotreadSweet'stestimonybacktothejury.%  @DX@X#D@DX#@DD#@XX@DZ##XXX@XZ#@XXXX%Z@DX@X#D@D9[#@DD#@XX@Di[##XXX@X[#@XXXX4#   5  @DX@X#D@D\#@DD/  #@XX@D~\##XXX@X\#@XXXX  d [FN4]6/\C\%   7t\@DX@X#D@DV]#@DD#@XX@D]##XXX@X+^#@XXXXԀThetrialjudgebroughtthejurybackintothecourtroomandexplainedthatthecourtcould  T  notanswerthequestionandcouldnotcommentontheevidence.  D   =U>݌̌X   @DX@X#D@D^#@DD , ,+ ,, ,,<+ ` hp x <  Sr o +W`  #@XX@D_##XXX@X`#@XXXX%  @DX@X#D@DDa#@DD#@XX@Dpa##XXX@Xa#@XXXX%ca@DX@X#D@Db#@DD#@XX@DGb##XXX@Xb#@XXXX4   5  @DX@X#D@Db#@DD/  #@XX@D\c##XXX@Xc#@XXXXFN4.6 c!c   7zRc@DX@X#D@D4d#@DD#@XX@Dd##XXX@Xd#@XXXXԀAtKelley'sfirsttrial,whenconfrontedwitharemarkablysimilarquestion,thetrial r  courthadallofSweet'stestimonyrereadtothejury.+W``݌ b  Ќ ,, ,,X  @DX@X#D@DXe#@DD , ,  <+ ` hp x <  SD  "g  #@XX@Df##XXX@Xf#@XXXX  %  @DX@X#D@Dh#@DD#@XX@DIh##XXX@Xh#@XXXX%