3.0 Murder Case Foster v Drekte 2005c

3.0 Murder Case Foster v Drekte 2005c - AUL 202 Comparative...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
AUL 202 – Comparative Criminal Law (Dr. Jones, fall 2009) Unit 5: Murder, the case of Kenneth Eugene Foster 1 Foster v. Dretke , 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13862 1 [*1] … CASE SUMMARY PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petitioner, [a] state inmate, filed this federal habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254, collaterally attacking his state-court conviction for capital murder and sentence of death. OVERVIEW: [petitioner] was driving a car in which he and [co-conspirators] were riding during several robberies, [petitioner] shared in the proceeds of the robberies, [he] stopped the car [allowing a] shooter to exit the car and attempt [a] robbery [that lead to a murder], [the petitioner] waited for the shooter to return to the car … and encouraged the shooter to hide the gun … when police stopped the car. … the federal habeas court held that [a] jury could have reasonably inferred that [petitioner] anticipated deadly force would be used by his co-conspirators during the course of [the] robberies. [However] the death sentence was imposed by the [state-trial] court without the jury’s determination on [issues] of fact. Therefore, the inmate’s death sentence was not supported by the necessary factual findings mandated by [U.S. Supreme Court]. OUTCOME: The instant court found that the inmate was entitled to a new sentencing hearing but [no] further [relief] . .. LEXIS Headnotes : HN15 . The standard for testing the sufficiency of evidence in a federal habeas review of a state court conviction is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution , any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence need not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence or be completely inconsistent with every conclusion except guilt so long as a reasonable trier of fact could find that the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. HN16 … to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to support a state criminal conviction, the court must look to state law for the substantive elements of the relevant criminal offense. Either direct or circumstantial evidence can contribute to the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the conviction. HN36 Claims of “actual innocence” based on newly discovered evidence do not constitute an independent ground for granting federal habeas corpus relief. 1 Kenneth Eugene Foster , JR., TDCJ No. 999232, Petitioner, v. Douglas Dretke , Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent . CIVIL NO. SA-02-CA-301-RF. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Div., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13862 (March 3, 2005). Subsequent History:
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 12/21/2009 for the course BULGARIA 8220 taught by Professor Jenkins during the Spring '09 term at American University in Bulgaria.

Page1 / 21

3.0 Murder Case Foster v Drekte 2005c - AUL 202 Comparative...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online