In a murder prosecution, the prosecution’s case was based almost entirely on the eyewitness testimony of a single accusing witness who himself had the opportunity and possible motive to commit the offense. On appeal, appellant challenged the improper introduction of triple hearsay statements, prosecutorial misconduct in eliciting evidence about the prior use of firearms in violation of an in limine order, and the restriction of cross examination of the lead investigating officer’s testimony concerning the eyewitness’s attempts to evade the police. The appellate court here held that the cumulative effect of the three significant trial errors was highly prejudicial to petitioner and so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the conviction a denial of due process, and reversed the order denying appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus.