Montgomery v. Bagley, No. 07-3882

In a death penalty case, district court's new trial order granting defendant's petition for habeas relief based on a finding that the state violated Brady is affirmed where: 1) a withheld pretrial report was exculpatory and should have been disclosed at trial; 2) it was material because, if true, it would likely change the outcome of the trial; and 3) the ultimate determination concerning the truth of the withheld report is for the state courts to resolve.  District court's denial of the Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend is affirmed and the remaining issues raised in petitioner's cross-appeal are pretermitted.

Read Montgomery v. Bagley, No. 07-3882

Argued: June 17, 2009

Decided and Filed: September 29, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Chief Judge Merritt

Counsel

For Appellant:  Stephen E. Maher, Officer of the Ohio Attorney General

For Appellee:  Richard Marvin Kerger, Kerger & Hartman, LLC