Here's a bunch of habeas-related stuff I have seen over the past several weeks:
There was a lot of coverage of the Seventh Circuit decision in MC Winston v. Boatwright. The issue was whether counsel was ineffective for using peremptory challenges to strike every male juror in violation of the Equal Protection Clause. The court concluded that this was deficient performance, but that there was no prejudice since the per se reversal rule for Batson violations was not clearly established until after the state courts had reviewed the claim. It's an aggressive use of the Musladin rule (for explanation of that rule you can read this post), but the court makes a good case that it was appropriate.
The Union Leader in New Hampshire had this article about a habeas petition filed by Katherine Mendola, who was convicted of attempting to hire a hitman to murder the wife of a lawyer with whom she sought a romantic relationship.
The Houston Chronicle had an article about the habeas petition filed by Nebraska inmate Germai Molina, who had been convicted of beating his toddler daughter.
Here is a post about a troubling case out of the Fifth Circuit in which petitioner Robert Allen Rabe raised serious questions about the reliability of the conviction. Apparently, petitioner had both alibi witnesses and an argument that the perpetrator seen on the surveillance video did not have tattoos on his arms, while petitioner's arms were heavily tattooed. Counsel did not raise these matters at trial. Here's what the post says about the case:
To the outside observer, it looks like Rabe got a raw deal. Maybe he's guilty, but he at least deserved a defense that included an alibi witness and a nod to the fact that the robber in the surveillance tape did not appear to have tattoos on his forearms as Rabe does.
No, these issues were not raised in Rabe's state appeal, but that seems to indicate that Rabe's counsel for the state appeal may have also been ineffective, elevating Rabe's ineffective counsel conundrum to meta status.
Sentencing Law and Policy had a post about a "[b]otched Ohio capital prosecution." The issue in the case was whether the State could be barred from re-prosecuting a successful habeas petitioner after the State failed to abide by the federal court's order granting habeas relief. It was a split decision with the majority concluding that the district court had the authority to bar re-prosecution.
Here is a post from a blog called "Legal As She Is Spoke" about a habeas denial from the Sixth Circuit in which petitioner had argued that his counsel was ineffective for falling asleep during the prosecution's cross-examination of petitioner. It's an interesting post that discusses other cases in which relief was denied based on a sleeping attorney.
An article from Metropolitan News Service (despite its appearance, the website seems legit) about the Ninth Circuit decision in Payton v. Cullen, in which the court denied habeas relief to a petitioner sentenced to death. The Ninth Circuit had previously granted habeas relief, but that decision was (surprise, surprise) reversed by the Supreme Court back in 2005.
From that same news source, another article about a habeas denial from the Ninth Circuit in Rossum v. Patrick. Here's the lead sentence in the article: "A woman whose husband was found dead in their bedroom, in a scene reminiscent of the film 'American Beauty,' yesterday lost her bid to overturn her murder conviction." In my mind, time has not been kind to that movie.
A post about an Eleventh Circuit decision denying habeas relief to a petitioner who argued that his sentence to life without parole as a juvenile offender was unconstitutional. I found this interesting: "As a Florida criminal appeals attorney, I was saddened to read, on page 45, that Florida stands out as the State that has the highest number of people sentenced to life without parole for non-homicide crimes committed while the people were juveniles. Out of the 123 inmates imprisoned nationwide, 77 are imprisoned in Florida."
Sticking with Florida, I had previously mentioned in this prior post about a huge habeas grant in which a federal judge in Florida concluded that a Florida drug law violated due process. Only problem, the Florida state courts are undeterred and will continue to apply the statute. The link is to a state court decision denying motions to dismiss in numerous cases on the basis of the federal court's ruling.
Don't really know what to make of this video, in which Captain Constitution takes on Habeas Corpsus.
Comments