In Re Miguel Angel Bacigalupo on Habeas Corpus — Liu, J., Concurring

Summary

The concurrence joins the court's conclusion that the prosecution violated petitioner's due process rights by withholding favorable, material evidence concerning confidential informant Gale Kesselman and that petitioner is entitled to relief. It emphasizes that the prosecution's misconduct tainted the pretrial materiality ruling, prevented the defense from discovering corroborating evidence supporting a duress defense, and affirmatively discouraged investigation into the murder-for-hire theory. The concurrence also explains why the potential testimony of witness Joseph could be considered despite hearsay objections and why all undisclosed evidence must be assessed cumulatively.