grant of a writ of habe-as corpus is AFFIRMED. The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to order Eddleman’s release unless the state grants Eddleman a new trial within a reasonable period. 1 . Consider the following exchange during the cross-examination of George Sebastian Pitian: Q. Would the fact that this man confessed to doing what he thought was a shooting of a gang member, but by mistake hit Joane Georgescu, would that kind of change your mind about that? A. Yeah. 2 . We agree with our statement in Nevers that the set of errors that are not harmless under the Brecht standard is a lesser included subset of the set of errors that are not harmless under the standard of Chapman plus AEDPA deference. See Nevers, 169 F.3d at 371-72; accord Polk, 401 F.3d at 264-66 (<HOLDING>); Robertson, 324 F.3d at 307 n. 5 (noting that
holding that the state court unreasonably applied chapman but that the error was not prejudicial under brecht holding the exclusion of cumulative evidence was not prejudicial error holding that chapman mandates harmless error analysis of griffin error holding that a federal habeas court performing a harmless error inquiry on collateral review must employ the standard for harmless error articulated in brecht even if the state courts have never reviewed the error on direct appeal recognizing that the state court need not explicitly rely on chapman to warrant federal review under brecht but not deciding the issue because the error was also harmless under chapman