CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
WILBERN WOODROW COOPER,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
WILLIS CHAPMAN, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
   No. 18-1391
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:15-cv-10679—Sean F. Cox, District Judge.
Argued: April 16, 2020
Decided and Filed: August 17, 2020
Before: MOORE, KETHLEDGE, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

JOHN K. BUSH, Circuit Judge. Wilbern Woodrow Cooper petitioned for habeas corpus on the ground that his first-degree felony murder conviction in Michigan state court violated Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). He contends that a custodial confession he gave in 2010 to the 1978 murder of David McKillop should have been excluded from evidence. We hold that the district court properly denied habeas relief because the Michigan trial court’s admission of the confession was not an error that rose to the level of actual prejudice. We therefore AFFIRM the district court’s denial of Cooper’s habeas petition.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
STEVIE L. ENGLAND,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
DEEDRA HART, Warden,
Respondent-Appellee.
   No. 18-6039
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Kentucky at Paducah.
No. 5:06-cv-00091—Thomas B. Russell, District Judge.
Argued: April 28, 2020
Decided and Filed: August 17, 2020
Before: SILER, MOORE, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

SILER, Circuit Judge. Stevie L. England, a Kentucky prisoner serving a life sentence, appeals from a district court’s judgment denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We granted a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on three issues raised by England. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). First, England claims that the trial court erroneously admitted his police confession given that he had invoked his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Second, he argues that the trial court’s improper admission of hearsay statements from the deceased victim was erroneously deemed harmless error. Finally, England argues that the prosecution suppressed evidence in violation of Brady. Because the state court did not err in its interpretation or application of federal law, we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of England’s habeas petition.