Legal Opinion

Dye v. Hofbauer

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided August 29, 2002No. 99.-1929PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PETER C. ECONOMUS, District Judge.

I. OVERVIEW

The petitioner, Paul Allen Dye (“Dye”), a Michigan prisoner convicted of first-and second-degree murders, appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. section 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition alleged, inter alia, prosecutorial misconduct.1 For the *429reasons set forth below, we find that the prosecutor’s misconduct was of a sufficient magnitude to violate Dye’s right to due process of law. Accordingly, we REVERSE the decision of the district court and issue the writ.

II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. Lindh v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  5. United States v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dye v. HofbauerSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  2. Dye v. HofbauerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
  3. Fraction v. MinnesotaDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2008

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API