Eighth Circuit: Jerome Emmanuel Davis v. Warden Kent Grandlienard

Habeas, AEDPA, Miranda


As the post-invocation statement admitted at the trial was facially exculpatatory and cumulative, state court did not err in denying Habeas.

Concur in J -- The statement was the only evidence placing the deft at the scene of the crime, but state court could have reasonably read it as harmless error.


Jerome Emmanuel Davis  v.  Warden Kent Grandlienard