Marks v. Lamarque
This text of 88 F. App'x 193 (Marks v. Lamarque) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Three witnesses identified petitioner as a participant in the victim’s robbery-murder. One of these witnesses further testified that petitioner ordered his accomplice to “bust on” the victim, at which point the accomplice fatally shot the victim. We need not decide whether the admission of petitioner’s confession was erroneous, because in light of the witnesses’ testimony, the confession did not have a “substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 623, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993). Any error was therefore harmless.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
88 F. App'x 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marks-v-lamarque-ca9-2004.