Samaniego v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KIRSCH, Judge.
Albert Samaniego appeals from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He presents several issues which we consolidate and restate as follows:
I. Whether the State withheld material evidence favorable to the defense;
II. Whether such evidence constituted newly discovered evidence;
III. Whether some of the prosecutor’s remarks constituted fundamental error; and,
IV. Whether Samaniego received ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel.
We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The facts underlying Samaniego’s conviction were set forth by our supreme court…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Giglio v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- McCleskey v. KempSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Rose v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Tyrice J. Halliburton v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2013
- In re the Personal Restraint of GentryWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- In re Pers. Restraint of GentryWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- Paul A. Moore v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2015