Skip to content
Name: Chein v. Shumsky
Case #: 01-56320
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 06/25/2004
Subsequent History: Cert. den. 11/1/04

False testimony by an expert witness regarding the details of his credentials was not “material” within the meaning of the California perjury statute. The federal court concluded that no reasonable jury could have concluded that all the elements of the crime of perjury were proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the defendant was entitled to habeas relief.