CHARLES A. ABY, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT PARRATT, WARDEN, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding sufficient evidence and corroboration for the conviction.
Petitioner was convicted of first-degree sexual assault in Nebraska state court. He sought federal habeas corpus relief, alleging uncorroborated testi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Corroboration Of Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner Charles A. Aby was convicted in 1978 in a Nebraska state court of first-degree sexual assault. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. State v. Aby, 205 Neb. 267, 287 N.W. 2d 68 (1980). Thereafter, petitioner sought habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, alleging that the testimony of the prosecuting witness was uncorroborated and that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support the petitioner’s conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. The District Court1 denied relief, and petitioner appealed. We affirm substantially for the reasons stated in the District Court’s memorandum opinion. See 8th Cir. R. 14.
We are guided, as was the District Court, by the presumption of correctness of the factual findings made by the Nebraska state courts. Sumner v. Mata, 449 U.S. 539, 101 S.Ct. 764, 66 L.Ed.2d 722 (1981). The District Court carefully reviewed those findings, and we cannot say that that court erred in concluding that the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, would support a finding by a rational trier of fact that the petitioner was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).
We also hold that a rational trier of fact could find that the prosecutrix’s testimony was corroborated to the extent required by Nebraska law. It is unnecessary to discuss, and we express no view on the question, whether a state-law requirement of corroboration has any due-process significance in a federal habeas proceeding applying the rule of Jackson v. Virginia, supra. In addition, we note that the District Court dismissed a third claim by petitioner — ineffective assistance of counsel — without prejudice, for failure to exhaust state remedies. Petitioner does not challenge this holding on appeal.
Affirmed.
. The Hon. Warren K. Urbom, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979)
- Sumner v. Mata, 449 U.S. 539 (U.S. 1981)