How have courts dealt with errors in the prosecution's evidence in a murder case?

Vega relies on Alcala v. Woodford (9th Cir. 2003) 334 F.3d 862. But that matter involved errors that were far more severe, including the erroneous exclusion of an expert witness on eyewitness identification, ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to present alibi evidence or investigate defenses, the erroneous exclusion of two witnesses who would support a third-party culpability defense, and the erroneous admission of inflammatory physical evidence related to the murder weapon. (Id. at p. 894.) The federal appellate court noted that "the cumulative impact of these errors goes to the heart of the prosecution's theory of the case and undermines every important element of proof

Page 24

offered by the prosecution" against the defendant. (Id. at p. 893.) No equivalent errors occurred here.