Curtis Keller v. State of Tennessee, W2020-00590-CCA-R3-PC

Background

June 12, 2008 Germantown home-invasion; occupants handcuffed at gunpoint; ransacked; victims identified organizers and participants. Petitioner was prosecuted under criminal-responsibility theory though not physically present at scene.
Convicted of multiple counts (especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated robbery, attempted aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, evading arrest); effective 300-year sentence. Convictions affirmed on direct appeal.
A ski mask recovered from the getaway van tested positive for the petitioner’s DNA; the State never alleged he wore the mask or was in the van. Petitioner repeatedly challenged the DNA evidence (including coram nobis petitions) without success.
Petitioner filed a post-conviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and seeking grand jury materials; an evidentiary hearing was held in January 2020.
Post-conviction court denied continuances (for independent DNA testing and re-subpoenaing Dr. Debnam), denied access to grand jury records, and rejected all ineffective-assistance claims; this appeal followed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Motion to continue evidentiary hearing to allow independent DNA testing and to re-subpoena Dr. Debnam	Keller: needed time to obtain independent testing and Dr. Debnam’s testimony to show contamination/contradiction of State DNA results	State: petitioner had years and multiple counsel to obtain testing; ski mask DNA was not critical to State’s theory	Denied — no abuse of discretion; delays were petitioner-controlled and mask evidence was not pivotal
Motion to inspect grand jury proceedings for original indictment	Keller: irregular typography suggested he might have been added last-minute; sought grand jury materials to investigate	State: grand jury proceedings are secret and no circumstances for disclosure shown	Denied — secrecy rules apply; no basis to unseal grand jury materials
Ineffective assistance — trial counsel failed to challenge DNA evidence (no independent testing, no TBI file review, limited cross-exam)	Keller: counsel should have investigated/testing to expose contamination or inconsistent TBI results	State: counsel reasonably deemed DNA noncritical; strategic choice to focus on co-defendants’ credibility; absence of DNA on mask would not refute criminal-responsibility theory	Denied — strategic decision after adequate preparation; no prejudice shown because mask was in van and not essential to theory
Ineffective assistance — counsel failed to object to prosecutor’s “super predator” remark in closing	Keller: remark was improper and prejudicial; counsel should have objected	State: counsel’s decision to avoid objecting was tactical to avoid highlighting comment and counsel mitigated in closing	Denied — counsel’s tactical choice was reasonable; not prejudicial on record
Ineffective assistance — failure to prevent petitioner’s exclusion from trial / failure to move for mistrial or withdraw after petitioner’s assault on counsel	Keller: counsel should have protected his right to be present and sought new counsel or mistrial	State: petitioner repeatedly disrupted trial, was warned, waived right by conduct; counsel raised withdrawal/mistrial and tried to continue; court found no conflict and counsel could proceed	Denied — exclusion comported with Rule 43(b); counsel’s choices were strategic and no reasonable probability of a different outcome shown
Ineffective assistance — failure to object to show-up (in-court) identification by Munson	Keller: show-up was suggestive and should have been objected to	State: Munson had prior opportunity to observe petitioner; other identification evidence existed	Denied — no prejudice shown given independent ID evidence
Ineffective assistance — appellate counsel omitted issues from appeal (continuance, exclusion, counsel withdrawal)	Keller: appellate counsel should have raised every trial error	State: appellate counsel reasonably selected strongest issues; not required to raise every claim	Denied — appellate strategy reasonable; omitted issues unlikely to succeed

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
Henley v. State, 960 S.W.2d 572 (Tenn. 1997) (post-conviction factual findings entitled to deference)
Baxter v. Rose, 523 S.W.2d 930 (Tenn. 1975) (competence standard for counsel)
Carpenter v. State, 126 S.W.3d 879 (Tenn. 2004) (appellate counsel not required to raise every issue)
State v. Mosley, 200 S.W.3d 624 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2005) (defendant’s right to be present at trial)
State v. Caruthers, 35 S.W.3d 516 (Tenn. 2000) (grand jury secrecy principles)
State v. Hartman, 42 S.W.3d 44 (Tenn. 2001) (prosecutor may not use inflammatory epithets in closing)
Moorehead v. State, 409 S.W.2d 357 (Tenn. 1966) (continuance decision rests in trial court’s discretion)