Ballinger v. Prelesnik
844 F. Supp. 2d 857
E.D. Mich.2012Background
- Petitioner Dwayne Ballinger, Jr. was convicted in Wayne Circuit Court of first-degree murder and felony-firearm and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole.
- Petitioner alleges ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to call an alibi witness and for errors regarding admission of an AK-47 as a trial exhibit.
- The state appellate courts denied relief on the IAC claim, and the Michigan Supreme Court denied leave to appeal.
- An evidentiary hearing was held in federal court; Petitioner's trial counsel testified to chaotic circumstances surrounding representation and alibi efforts.
- The federal court held the IAC claim had merit and ordered relief; other claims relating to prosecutorial misconduct involving the AK-47 were denied.
- The court issued a conditional grant of the writ, potentially requiring a new trial unless Petitioner is released or retried.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| IAC due to failing to pursue alibi defense | Ballinger contends counsel failed to investigate/call Krisel as alibi. | State argues record insufficient to prove deficient performance or prejudice. | Granted relief on IAC (prejudice shown; substantial alibi evidence not explored). |
| Prejudice under Strickland if alibi not presented | Ballinger asserts alibi would likely have changed outcome. | State asserts two eyewitnesses identified Ballinger; impact uncertain. | Prejudice shown; likely different result if alibi presented. |
| Prosecutorial misconduct regarding AK-47 | Prosecutor used AK-47 without proving similarity; implied weapon used. | Admissibility as demonstrative evidence or proper framing; no due process violation. | Claims rejected; no reversible error under harmless error standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Cullen v. Pinholster, 131 S. Ct. 1388 (U.S. 2011) (limits habeas review to record before state court but allows de novo fact-finding on some claims)
- Nix v. Whiteside, 475 U.S. 157 (U.S. 1986) (counsel may not facilitate perjury; duty to advocate lawfully)
- Romppilla v. Beard, 545 U.S. 374 (U.S. 2005) (duty to conduct prompt investigation irrespective of defendant’s statements)
- Ramonez v. Berghuis, 490 F.3d 482 (6th Cir. 2007) (testimony of alibi witness could affect credibility and outcome when not presented)