On Point blog, page 21 of 32
Postconviction proceedings: right to counsel/ineffective assistance of counsel
State v. Ouati K. Ali, 2011AP2169, District 4, 11/1/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Postconviction Proceedings – Right to Counsel
A defendant has no constitutional right to counsel outside the direct appeal period, therefore Ali’s argument that failure to appoint counsel counsel to pursue DNA testing deprived him of due process is a non-starter.
¶12 Ali does not claim that the public defender erroneously exercised its discretion in declining to appoint him counsel for the purpose of pursuing his motion for postconviction DNA testing.
Nicole Harris v. Sheryl Thompson, 7th Cir No. 12-1088, 10/18/12
seventh circuit decision (html) (90-page pdf download: here), granting habeas relief in 904 N.E.2d 1077 (Ill. App. 2009)
A significant decision in several respects – not least, attorney performance – that a summary post cannot hope to capture, save broad highlights. Executive summary: Harris was convicted of killing her 4-year-old son Jaquari, against a defense of accidental death (self-strangulation with an elastic band). The defense had potential,
TPR – Right to Meaningful Participation – Lack of Objection
Veronica K. v. Michael K., 2012AP197, District 1, 10/10/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Michael K., incarcerated at the time of this TPR trial, appeared by audio-video hookup. He argues that his due process right to meaningful participation, State v. Lavelle W., 2005 WI App 266, ¶2, 288 Wis. 2d 504, 708 N.W.2d 698, in light of his numerous contemporaneous complaints he couldn’t hear the proceedings.
Christopher Mosley v. Atchison, 7th Cir No. 12-1083, 8/6/12
Habeas Procedure – Appellate Jurisdiction
Where a party has filed a timely notice of appeal to a judgment, and the district court subsequently enters an amended judgment nunc pro tunc (“now for then”) conforming language in the original judgment, an amended notice of appeal isn’t necessary to confer appellate jurisdiction:
… The district court’s February 3, 2012 judgment thus had retroactive legal effect back to August 26,
Stephen Toliver v. Pollard, 7th Cir No. 11-1577, 8/6/12
seventh circuit court of appeals decision, affirming habeas grant following remand in 539 F.3d 766 (further case history: here)
Habeas Review – Evidentiary Hearing
The rule of Cullen v. Pinholster, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (2011), that 2254(d)(1) review is limited to the state-court record, doesn’t apply where the state court didn’t address a component part of the claim (here,
Steven R. Rann v. Atchison, 7th Cir No. 11-3502, 8/3/12
seventh circuit court of appeals decision
Habeas Review – IAC/Suppression Claim, Generally
Under Strickland, Rann must show that his counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced his defense. Grosshans, 424 F.3d at 590 (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687). When reviewing claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in habeas petitions, however, we must honor any reasonable state court decision,
Search & Seizure: Consent to Blood Draw – Test for Seizure of Person; Ineffective Assistance: Unobjected-to Evidence of Victim’s Character – No Prejduice
State v. Jason M. Jacobs, 2012 WI App 104 (recommended for publication); case activity
Search & Seizure – Consent – Blood Draw
Following a fatal traffic accident, Jacobs performed field sobriety tests well enough that he wasn’t placed under arrest, but he was asked to submit to a blood draw. Jacobs called his attorney, who advised him not to consent to the draw, but Jacobs nonetheless agreed to go to the hospital with an officer to have a blood test.
TPR – Federal / Wisconsin Indian Child Welfare Act
Jackson Co. DHS v. Robert H., 2011AP2783, District 4, 7/17/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, ineligible for publication); case activity
Both federal and state Indian Child Welfare Acts require that termination of parental rights to an Indian child be supported by testimony of a qualified expert witness “that the continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child,” 25 U.S.C.
Effective Assistance of Counsel – Sentencing
State v. Troy D. Jefferson, 2011AP1778-CR, District 1, 6/26/12
court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity
Counsel was ineffective for failing to inform the sentencing court “about Jefferson’s good character and positive social history.”
¶17 Specifically, trial counsel’s failure to inform the trial court about Jefferson’s good character and positive social history in any meaningful way was deficient because it was not,
TPR – Summary Judgment on Grounds – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Michael B. v. Marcy M., 2011AP2846, District 2, 5/16/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Marcy M.: Jane S. Earle; case activity
By responding (inadequately) to a TPR motion for summary judgment on grounds with a letter rather than evidence such as an affidavit, counsel provided ineffective assistance.
¶10 We disagree that counsel’s performance was “not ineffective.” In the face of summary judgment that would deprive Marcy of a jury determination on her failure to assume parental responsibility,