Simpson v. United States, 693 F. App'x 33

David Z. Simpson was convicted by a jury of conspiring to import and importing 500+ grams of cocaine and related possession/conspiracy offenses; he received concurrent 135-month sentences and five years supervised release.
Simpson’s direct appeal was affirmed by this Court prior to his § 2255 collateral attack.
In his § 2255 motion Simpson argued the government violated Brady by failing to disclose prior inconsistent statements allegedly made by government witness Michelle Yearwood, or alternatively that trial counsel was ineffective for not using such statements to impeach her.
Simpson’s inference of prior inconsistent statements relied on two documents from a co-conspirator’s (Sheldon Holder) prosecution: a criminal complaint and a presentence investigation report; he alleged those documents showed Yearwood previously contradicted her trial testimony.
The district court assumed, for argument’s sake, the statements existed but found Simpson failed to show prejudice/materiality because strong independent evidence (arrest at airport, phone/parking records linking Simpson to Yearwood, notes in his pockets linking him to co-conspirators) undercut any reasonable probability the undisclosed impeachment would change the verdict.
The Second Circuit affirmed, holding that even if impeachment evidence was withheld, Simpson did not show a reasonable probability the outcome would have been different.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Brady violation for nondisclosure of prior inconsistent statements	Simpson: government failed to disclose favorable impeachment material (Yearwood’s alleged prior statements)	Government: either disclosed or any nondisclosure was not material given trial evidence	Held: Assuming statements existed, Simpson failed to show materiality/prejudice; no Brady violation altered outcome
Ineffective assistance for failure to impeach Yearwood	Simpson: trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for not using alleged prior statements to impeach Yearwood	Government/district court: impeachment would have been marginal and insufficient given corroborating evidence	Held: No ineffective-assistance relief because no reasonable probability of different result

Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution must disclose materially favorable evidence)
Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (1999) (elements and materiality standard for Brady claims)
United States v. Madori, 419 F.3d 159 (2d Cir. 2005) (reasonable-probability materiality standard applied in this Circuit)
United States v. Orena, 145 F.3d 551 (2d Cir. 1998) (strength of independent evidence bears on materiality assessment)