establish a claim based on newly discovered evidence Barbour’s Brady claim was procedurally barred.’ “At Madison’s third trial, this Court ordered that his trial counsel ‘have entire open file discovery’ from the State. (R. 11) Madison fails to proffer a single fact in ... his Rule 32 petition, raising the slightest inference his postconviction Brady claim is based on newly discovered evidence. Madison does not mention Rule 32.1(e) in his Rule 32 petition much less acknowledge its requirements. Because Madison proffers no fact in his Rule 32 petition showing the Brady claim ... is based on newly discovered evidence, the Court finds it is procedurally barred from postconviction review. Rules 32.2(a)(3) and (a)(5), Ala.R.Crim.P. See State v. Tarver, 629 So.2d 14, 19 (Ala.Crim.App.1993) (<HOLDING>).” (C.R. 207-09.) The circuit court’s findings
holding that if a trial court has rejected death as a possible sentence double jeopardy bars the state from seeking the death penalty at resentencing even where rejection of the death sentence was based on a legal error holding that absent some showing that prosecutorial discretion was abused in the selection of cases in which the death penalty was sought there is no basis for either a claim under the eighth amendment or a claim under the equal protection clause holding that leaning towards the death penalty is not the same as an automatic vote for the death penalty holding that the procedural bars of rule 32 apply with equal force to all cases including those in which the death penalty has been imposed holding the death penalty disproportionately cruel and unusual when imposed for the crime of rape