The following excerpt is from Bartholomew v. Wood, 96 F.3d 1451 (9th Cir. 1996):
We now consider the other arguments petitioner made in his habeas petition. Petitioner contends that 1) that the prosecution knowingly presented perjured testimony in violation of Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959); and 2) that he was prejudiced by ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. After considering petitioner's arguments, we find no prejudicial error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court order denying the petition.
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.