Carver v. State

Summary

The court affirmed denial of Carver’s petition for a writ of actual innocence. It held that materiality must be assessed cumulatively in the context of the entire adversarial proceeding, including admitted evidence, evidence available but not offered or excluded, and trial strategy, but concluded that Carver’s evidence did not create a substantial or significant possibility of a different verdict. The court further held that evidence of the firearms expert’s fraud was newly discovered, but a defense expert’s post-trial opinion was not, and that the witness’s unserved warrants could have been discovered with due diligence.