By: Derek Hawkins//September 14, 2015//
Civil
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Officials: WILLIAMS, TINDER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges
Admission of Evidence – Harmless Error
14-1380 Mark D. Jensen v. Marc Clements
Circuit court error of admitting letter implicating appellant of murder weeks before murder occurred prejudiced appellant.
“We recognize that “an unreasonable application of federal law is different from an incorrect application of federal law.” Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011). But the state appellate court’s ruling was not simply incorrect. The state trial judge recognized this when he called the letter’s admittance “grave constitutional error” when he foresaw the Giles ruling. That the jury improperly heard Julie’s voice from the grave in the way it did means there is no doubt that Jensen’s rights under the federal Confrontation Clause were violated. Any reasonable jurist using the proper standard would have to find “grave doubt” about whether that violation is harmless. The error in admission had a substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict; it was one “well understood and comprehended in existing law beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement.” Richter, 562 U.S. at 103. Because Jensen satisfies the Brecht standard, he necessarily satisfies the AEDPA standard of an unreasonable application of the Chapman harmless error standard. See Ayala, 135 S. Ct. at 138; Fry, 551 U.S. at 120.”
Affirmed