Habeas corpus; Whether the state trial court’s rulings prevented petitioner from establishing a complete defense; Washington v Texas; Chambers v Mississippi; Ungar v Sarafite; Ferensic v Birkett; Whether the state court unreasonably applied “clearly established” law; Application of the Antiterrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act standard; Whether the errors were “prejudicial”; Brecht v Abrahamson

[This appeal was from the WD-MI.] In an order, the court denied a petition for rehearing en banc. After a majority of judges previously voted for rehearing en banc, the court vacated its original opinion in this case and later issued the amended opinion at issue here (see eJournal # 83651 in the 5/13/25 edition). The amended opinion again held that the Michigan trial court deprived petitioner-Chandler of his right to present a complete defense and that the Michigan Court of Appeals unreasonably applied Supreme Court law. Thus, it again reversed the district court’s denial of habeas relief and granted Chandler a conditional writ of habeas corpus.