# Gerald Eugene Stano v. Richard L. Dugger, Robert A. Butterworth

> Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 1, 1990 · 901 F.2d 898

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9480256

## Case

- **Full name:** Gerald Eugene STANO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard L. DUGGER, Robert A. Butterworth, Respondents-Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- **Decided:** May 1, 1990
- **Citations:** 901 F.2d 898; 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 6839; 1990 WL 56499
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Fay
- **Judges:** Tjoflat, Fay, Kravitch, Johnson, Hatchett, Anderson, Clark, Edmondson, Cox
- **Cited by:** 61 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9480256

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that the defendant’s burden to prove the materiality of suppressed impeachment evidence was lightened in view of the fact that a previous jury had been unable to find the defendant guilty

## Opinion text

FAY, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
Gerald Stano has confessed to murdering a large number of young ladies. This case involves the murder of Cathy Scharf. Unlike Stano’s other cases, he went to trial in this one. He was convicted and sentenced to death. That judgment was affirmed by the state appellate courts and the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari. In this habeas action, Stano raised a large number of issues. The district court entered a lengthy detailed order denying relief. A panel of this court reviewed the multiple issues presented on appeal and affirmed the denial. Judge Anderson filed a partial dissent. The case was taken for en banc review.
A majority of the en banc court feels there should be an evidentiary hearing on the Brady and Henry claims. Nothing presented throughout the lengthy consideration of this matter has convinced me that such is warranted by either the alleged facts or existing precedent. Most respectfully, I dissent for the reasons set forth in the majority opinion found at 883 F.2d 900 .

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9480256. Public record. Not legal advice.