Consalvo v. Secretary for the Dept. of Corrections, No. 10-10533 (11th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CasePetitioner was convicted in Florida state court of armed burglary and first-degree murder and a death sentence was imposed. On appeal, petitioner argued that he was entitled to habeas relief because the state withheld material exculpatory evidence and knowingly presented false or misleading evidence to the jury at his trial. Petitioner also contended that the sentencing state court, in its sentencing order, erred in relying on deposition testimony that was not presented in open court either at the guilt or the penalty phase. The court held that petitioner had not carried his burden of establishing that the state court's factual determinations were unreasonable, and therefore petitioner had also not established that Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States were contravened or unreasonably applied by the Florida Supreme Court. The court also held that petitioner had not carried his burden of demonstrating that the Florida Supreme Court's conclusion that the sentencer's reference to non-trial testimony was contrary to or involved an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court precedent. Accordingly, the district court's order denying petitioner's habeas petition was affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.