California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from In re Roberts, 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 762, 29 Cal.4th 726, 60 P.3d 165 (Cal. 2003):
Section 1473, subdivision (b)(1) provides that a writ of habeas corpus may be prosecuted if "[f]alse evidence that is substantially material probative on the issue of guilt or punishment was introduced against a person at any hearing or trial relating to his incarceration...." False evidence is "substantially material or probative" (ibid.) "if there is a `reasonable probability' that, had it not been introduced, the result would have been different. [Citation.]" (In re Sassounian (1995) 9 Cal.4th 535, 546, 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 446, 887 P.2d 527.) The requisite "reasonable probability" is a chance great enough, under the totality of the circumstances, to undermine our confidence in the outcome. (Ibid.) The petitioner is not required to show that the prosecution knew or should have known that the testimony was false. ( 1473, subd. (c); People v. Marshall (1996) 13 Cal.4th 799, 830, 55 Cal.Rptr.2d 347, 919 P.2d 1280.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.