Reyes v. Mitchell

Reyes v. Mitchell

Case Number:	1:2018cv40147
Filed:	April 1, 2020
Court:	US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office:	Boston Office
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 1, 2020	Filing 28 Judge William G. Young: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDERThe Appeals Court reasonably applied federal law in concluding that LeRoy did not violate Reyess Sixth Amendment right as to the impeachment methods used during trial or by choosing not to c all Dr. Begany as an expert witness. The Appeals Courts conclusion that it was reasonable for LeRoy to withhold important information from his own expert witness was, however, unreasonable. Nevertheless, LeRoys conduct was not prejudicial. Therefo re, this Court DENIES Claim I.The Appeals Court did unreasonably review the factual record and based its decision on these misconceptions. After a de novo analysis, this Court rules that LeRoys impeachment decisions were not unreasonable or prejudicial, and while LeRoys decision not to inform Dr. Begany about the ghost stories was unreasonable, it was not prejudicial. Therefore, this Court DENIES Claim II. SO ORDERED.(Sonnenberg, Elizabeth)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 1, 2020

Filing 28 Judge William G. Young: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDERThe Appeals Court reasonably applied federal law in concluding that LeRoy did not violate Reyess Sixth Amendment right as to the impeachment methods used during trial or by choosing not to c all Dr. Begany as an expert witness. The Appeals Courts conclusion that it was reasonable for LeRoy to withhold important information from his own expert witness was, however, unreasonable. Nevertheless, LeRoys conduct was not prejudicial. Therefo re, this Court DENIES Claim I.The Appeals Court did unreasonably review the factual record and based its decision on these misconceptions. After a de novo analysis, this Court rules that LeRoys impeachment decisions were not unreasonable or prejudicial, and while LeRoys decision not to inform Dr. Begany about the ghost stories was unreasonable, it was not prejudicial. Therefore, this Court DENIES Claim II. SO ORDERED.(Sonnenberg, Elizabeth)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Reyes v. Mitchell
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?