Rapelje v. Blackston

(1) Whether the Sixth Circuit erred when it granted habeas relief based on the theory that respondent was denied the right to confront the two witnesses when the state courts did not allow him to introduce their post-testimony written recantations to impeach their former testimony; (2) whether the Sixth Circuit erred in holding that a written statement recanting former testimony is not "extrinsic" to that testimony and that such statements may be admitted by merely "recit[ing] [them] to the jury" without an authenticating witness; and (3) whether the Sixth Circuit erred in concluding that the state court"s determination that any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt was objectively unreasonable, where there was other substantial evidence of respondent"s guilt and the evidence was interlocking and not dependent on the credibility of any single witness.