Bass v. United States
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 18679
8th Cir.2011Background
- Bass was convicted of conspiracy to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base; district court granted his 2255 motion for post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of trial counsel; government appealed the grant and this court reversed on a different issue; on remand Bass was sentenced to the 10-year minimum and challenged sufficiency of the evidence; the current appeal concerns ineffective assistance of trial counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 2255; district court found counsel deficient for failing to object to Harper’s testimony, Jackson testimony, and government vouching in closing; this court reverses.
- Evidence at trial included multiple witnesses tying Bass to crack cocaine transactions; contested issues included prior witness credibility and potential prejudice from testimony.
- The government’s first appeal indicated Harper’s testimony mattered but there was overwhelming evidence of conspiracy; prior perjury of a witness does not automatically bar testimony; the core evidence supported the conviction.
- The court ultimately held 2255 relief was improper for the challenged ineffective-assistance claims and reversed the district court’s grant of relief.
- The decision clarifies that failing to file in limine to preclude a witness and objections to limited testimony do not automatically render counsel ineffective where the record shows overwhelming evidence of guilt and no prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was deficient for failing to move to preclude Harper | Bass | Bass did not suffer prejudice | No deficient performance or prejudice |
| Whether trial counsel was deficient for failing to object to Jackson testimony and vouching | Bass | Bass suffered no prejudice; comments not improper vouching | No deficient performance or prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Regenos, 405 F.3d 691 (8th Cir. 2005) (clear-error review of factual findings in § 2255; Strickland applied)
- Theus v. United States, 611 F.3d 441 (8th Cir. 2010) (Strickland prejudice standard)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance)
- Snell v. Lockhart, 14 F.3d 1289 (8th Cir. 1994) (prejudice requires a reasonable probability of a different outcome)
- United States v. Roundtree, 534 F.3d 876 (8th Cir. 2008) (permitted discussion of witnesses' credibility and safeguards; not improper vouching)
- United States v. McClellon, 578 F.3d 846 (8th Cir. 2009) (prosecutor may argue credibility, not vouching)
- United States v. Littrell, 439 F.3d 875 (8th Cir. 2006) (statements about witnesses' truthfulness evaluated in context)
- United States v. Jackson, 915 F.2d 359 (8th Cir. 1990) (comments that witness is telling the truth not improper vouching)