Florida prisoner Crosley Green, convicted of murder, armed robbery, and kidnapping with bodily injury for the 1989 killing of Charles Flynn, sought federal habeas relief on nineteen claims. The district court granted relief on one Brady claim, finding the State had withheld handwritten police notes reflecting two deputies’ suspicions that Kim Hallock, the surviving witness, may have killed Flynn; the State appealed, and Green cross-appealed the denial of relief on other claims. The Eleventh Circuit held that Green had not exhausted this specific Brady claim in state court: his earlier appeal challenged a related ineffective-assistance claim, which did not fairly present the distinct claim that the prosecution suppressed the notes. Because the claim was unexhausted and procedurally defaulted, the district court could reach its merits only if Green showed cause and prejudice or satisfied the actual-innocence gateway. The court held that Green established neither; his new evidence—including recantations and alibi testimony—did not show that no reasonable juror would have convicted him. The majority therefore reversed the grant of habeas relief and affirmed the denial of relief on Green’s cross-appeal. Judge Jordan dissented in part, concluding that Green had fairly presented and exhausted the notes-based Brady claim, but concurred that the claim and Green’s other claims did not warrant habeas relief.