Circuit Upholds the Grant of Writ on Brady Claim

Today in Harris v. Lafler, 05-2104/2159, a non-capital habeas case, the Sixth Circuit panel (Rogers, Sutton, McKeague) affirmed the district court's grant of the writ on petitioner's Brady violation claim. Harris was convicted of second degree murder, among other charges, for shooting a fellow he had had a bar fight with from a moving vehicle on I-96. The Brady claim involved information that came to light after the trial showing that police had made several promises of leniency to the only witness linking Harris to the shooting.

Procedurally, Harris's petition contained three unexhausted claims out of thirteen. In ruling on the petition, the district court went straight to the merits and didn't address the state's argument that the court couldn't hear any of the claims until they were all exhausted. Ordinarily this would result in the Circuit vacating and remanding to do one of four things: 1) dismiss the entire petition; 2) stay and abey to permit the petitioner to present the unexhausted claims in state court; 3) permit the petitioner to dismiss the unexhausted claims and proceed; or 4) ignore the exhaustion requirement and deny the petition on the merits. In this case however, Harris had agreed in his brief to dismiss the unexhausted claims and the state had not insisted on a remand. The court reasoned that since the exhaustion requirement does not define subject matter jurisdiction it may be waived by the state. The court further reasoned that a speedy resolution to Harris's claims was in the best interest of both parties. Noting that the witness's testimony was the only piece of evidence against Harris, the court acknowledged that the state's promises to the witness gave him every incentive to lie in his testimony, and the suppression of the Brady material thus undermined confidence in the verdict.