On Point blog, page 2 of 2
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,
Habeas – IAC – NGI Defense
Albert Price v. Thurmer, 7th Cir No. 09-3851, 4/18/11
7th circuit court of appeals decision, on remand after prior appeal, 514 F.3d 729, denying relief on review of unpublished decision of Wis COA
Habeas – IAC – NGI Defense
Trial counsel seemingly mishandled the court-appointed NGI expert, in failing to cure the latter’s apparent misapprehension that he couldn’t rely on eyewitness reports of Price’s behavior absent determination of their credibility by the trial judge.
Maurice Coleman v. Ramos, 7th Cir No. 08-3537, 11/19/10
seventh circuit decision; denying rehearing and amending panel decision, Coleman v. Hardy (per curiam , 2/7/11)
Habeas – Defaulted Claim – Assertion of Innocence
Although Coleman defaulted his ineffective assistance of counsel claim by failing to raise it in state court, his allegation of actual innocence supports a “gateway” evidentiary hearing to determine whether to reach the merits of the defaulted claim.
Default may be excused if the petitioner can show 1) “cause”
Habeas – Procedural default, Evidentiary hearing
Alan Ward v. Deppisch, 7th Cir No. 08-2809, 07/23/2010
7th circuit decision, review of unpublished court of appeals decision
Habeas – Procedural Default
The state argues that Ward procedurally defaulted his claim because he failed to fairly present the Wisconsin courts with a federal issue, and the state courts ruled against Ward based on adequate and independent state law grounds. We disagree. A review of Ward’s postconviction motion before the state court shows that he fairly presented a federal issue.