Chia was convicted of being an accomplice to the murders of two DEA agents, and participating in a conspiracy to rob and kill the agents. Chia claimed that he had tried to talk one of the co-conspirators, Wang, out of the plot. Wang confirmed to the authorities that Chia had nothing to do with the conspiracy, but the trial court excluded these statements from the jury. The appellate court here reversed the denial of Chia’s habeas petition. The trial court’s decision to exclude reliable material evidence of Chia’s innocence constituted an objectively unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. Wang’s statements were reliable and critical to Chia’s defense; if believed by the jury, they would have exonerated him.