No. 18-9527

Thomas Branagan v. Isidro Baca, Warden, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-06-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: child-victim civil-rights criminal-procedure due-process evidence evidentiary-issues ineffective-assistance-of-counsel prosecutorial-misconduct sexual-assault standing testimony-inconsistency witness-credibility witness-testimony
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the defendant's constitutional rights were violated due to ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : Quests [Res ENT Ed | Uy after Z fold Lekechive Mason at guestansg.Z wns ho | | soy medications Copiates) avd Ant; suchobre medication. | He wool! My Fstop a vestraniue me About whrt supposine ArippHes | | ‘th #he com lated is Witt ESS a Fm 0 lel Detective mason Shak ws BEIM feented fr PLE Veteeens Admivi’steahos foe PTSD, Br Pole, anc ADY-D. Awe/ Sleep Ay'sonS ek’, Ni Zalso fold him that with Phe sleepina discecdee my motu most of the pime LT was VA A Fo “ _ ) TBe judge rt teral Knew defen! ant wns on Ain meheatend Ib cause 1 told the judee L was (hn paw while Festi fFyow ; Ibu tick was NOT lacved te the j ur why LT was oN [pain mediemtion on st's CF €ectS, On the ovt come volWig me moe Joss ok 5&x dave feom the medication Ane psych | Ede pti on ; ) yr didw t the paral atoeneu foe defens did sot obtard ll me reption Myst faom the Veteedits Admilistentron of Dr Cede ee al lhe said be chetwt Need them b) Zeal atceney did wot event pend phe Discovegy on be wovld pave Knew what maladies defendant wns svSening I nom Avcl maybe would have investiaasted the side Ehlecks _ ; [ Phom hé pain medication aud antipsychotie med eationS Niawby after L tol debenss atoentey thet Ldidwt | |Remembe most of the AM wheeview with Det Masel pond Z wele vp tN Clark Count aah da ater ; @ . Ae did wot even investigate tke questioning OR what defendant satd because L did wt Sven AemembeR lL ostok ff, Z was ip 4 Room Bl hu myself Aud wot guew Kriouruwce why #1 LD eanlita harled my self lou E And Not Remémbttine Any of sf, Lwas told Lat Z had #he men€y IN MY pEbSON, él The outce wWitné $$ dicl not even td entr $ thE cleferichaut | ak Peelim heaeing , Stell why diol sf Qo _on/ Z N| Ay at Peelim the mother Victoe a WAS SV posel tele loher happen, Bot in taal she testified (# wasnt lth twe befoee taral that Lenak the daughter ee a) other \ictoein also sard hee dnvghtee eetleeed athnt { e Feowt ot male praetis Dick byt recanted at teal when asked Agaval | iM Mother Victoeia also stated that hee dav hte Leyak told iP ce sister Pegrlla the auntot Leyah that some thin a entcl but Recantécl At teal, 2) Aut Perse. Va was the fiest adlt flat ,vestiovecl Le ah | hw en She took to hee place and she told her wothin sw h hen the child was queshonted Det Mason she. laid nk say anything happened with defendadt We if hy el idwt +he Detectives g vestion Daniel sincé fe | las suppose te have been the Crest peeson she told ~ i was Aboot 14 yosold at the time ; | / ) Why the state ment that ws ave ted 50 m1 AN 4 Pes AI a | as never detinecl by paostevtiad At all, d) Lib, ov Reciecct examivetronl buy phe state af PhElin cowie Leuah again tes trFied that defeudavt Thomas _| —_lwever “made hee Suck his front paet phat shedilaot _| ie ere eer a I tot Kiwow why she sad PAAt, 56 wh did tteo to tank (MW ho when Viebern testiSiel at Perak. that the oaly bhew pant Leneh told hee ow the phone “ithappened “Leywh cel wot Eluctdate Avy deterls oe tell Victsera what hoe meant Anid to his da. ONE Knows. hh did the destify aboot what happened at ALL even PE Ista te mewts she made ow the Fl cukh she nzpale veeu_ Ispecific Allega hows to polize which she at erboted to Leva. 1 50 liteenlls, Vickoera admits that when she spots te Se i eee ao Wh when Victoeta Finwly speaks to Leyah, Leyak chances ecmnerenrerrae de Cenclaot icRing hE up Flom the Floe awe puttin lA 6k ON btR G Rand moth £255 bee neg FAE SAME only pacs a Asm € she tells hee mothee that she told cefewdant that. | be was huweery Ave he Seoppéel hi's pats Awe ceabbed _ | 1's penis And said "Th srs break$ast | 6) ao Wowbinwe -Z#¢ 1s clean thet Leyah statement churceed From tue | eres parve,Caom st tastes Nike cand,” fo “this 1s beenkfast | | 54s 18 BSUENIF cAnt Chance, tN phat pkApptnes that | eysh 13 vet makiale thine $v ai | why at teal Leyah states that she Hever “Lal bee sisteg l ida thyt defeaidawt made hee suck hi's peai's _ aa) Levah testifies that she pemembess peshFy ing ak the Peelim ener that she

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-06
Waiver of right of respondent Isidro Baca, et al. to respond filed.
2019-05-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 3, 2019)

Attorneys

Isidro Baca, et al., et al.
Allison Lucille HerrOffice of the Nevada Attorney General, Respondent
Allison Lucille HerrOffice of the Nevada Attorney General, Respondent
Thomas Branagan
Thomas Branagan — Petitioner
Thomas Branagan — Petitioner