Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Anna Valentine, Warden v. Johnny Phillips
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 18-6184 · judgment September 1, 2020
Before the decision, about 1.9× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a state or local-government petitioner, a circuit split argued in the petition, and a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition).
Question presented
Respondent Johnny Phillips was convicted of wanton murder for shooting Phillip Glodo in the back of the head. Phillips filed a petition for federal habeas relief in district court claiming the state violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), by failing to provide in discovery an autopsy x-ray of Glodo’s skull. The district court conducted an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the x-ray was favorable and material to Phillips’s defense and therefore subject to disclosure under Brady. Two expert witnesses testified at the hearing about the significance of the x-ray. Phillips’s expert was Larry Dehus, a forensic scientist and ballistics expert, and the Warden’s expert was Dr. Jennifer Schott, the medical examiner who conducted Glodo’s autopsy. The district court did not find Dehus’s testimony about the significance of the x-ray reliable, and chose instead to rely on Dr. Schott’s testimony. Based upon its findings, the district court rejected Phillips’s claim that the autopsy x-ray was favorable and material under Brady. A divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed the district court, giving no meaningful deference to the district court’s expert witness credibility determination. And, it adopted an entirely new standard, holding that the district court should have credited the testimony of Phillips’s expert merely because that testimony was not “blatantly self-serving or dishonest.” Phillips v. Valentine, 826 F. App’x 447, 460 (6th Cir. 2020). Applying that novel standard, the Sixth Circuit found that the autopsy x-ray was in fact favorable and material to Phillips’s defense, and therefore should have been disclosed to Phillips in discovery.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Courtney J. Hightower
Attorney General's Office
For respondent
Alan Evan Schoenfeld
Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr, LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Proceedings
- Oct 04 2021Petition DENIED.
- Jun 16 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
- May 28 2021Brief of respondent Johnny Phillips in opposition filed.
- Apr 26 2021Supplemental brief of petitioner Anna Valentine filed.
- Apr 23 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 28, 2021.
- Apr 22 2021Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 28, 2021 to May 28, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
- Mar 29 2021Response Requested. (Due April 28, 2021)
- Mar 16 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2021.
- Mar 11 2021Waiver of right of respondent Johnny Phillips to respond filed.
- Mar 05 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 8, 2021)