The following excerpt is from Mitchell v. Barnes, No. CIV S-09-0785 EFB P (E.D. Cal. 2011):
required by the Constitution or federal law." Laboa v. Calderon, 224 F.3d 972, 979 (9th Cir. 2000). See also Harrington v. Nix, 983 F.2d 872, 874 (8th Cir.1993) ("[S]tate laws requiring corroboration do not implicate constitutional concerns that can be addressed on habeas review."). Therefore, petitioner's claim that uncorroborated accomplice testimony was improperly used to support his conviction is not cognizable in this federal habeas corpus proceeding.
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.