Back in November, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in an ineffectiveness assistance of counsel case that clocked in at just under ten pages. Judge Beistline, sitting by designation from the District of Alaska, authored the opinion.
After I read the thing, I said at some length that I thought that there was a much stronger prejudice argument than the one that Judge Beistline made. One that focused on the fact that the recantation of molestation claims to a priest may be much stronger evidence than a similar recantation to someone else.
This morning, the Ninth Circuit amended the prior opinion. Bulking it up from ten pages to over thirty. As well as redesignating it as per curiam.
Check out the final half-dozen pages of the opinion. Which articulate the "But He's a Priest!" argument that I made after the initial opinion came out.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
The modified opinion is much more solid and persuasive than the original one.