Darden v. United States
3:22-cv-00155
| M.D. Tenn. | Mar 3, 2025Background
- Marcus Darden was convicted on multiple charges, including RICO conspiracy and drug trafficking, related to his leadership in the Gangster Disciples gang in Clarksville, Tennessee.
- Darden was found guilty and sentenced to 480 months in prison after a nearly two-month trial featuring significant evidence of racketeering and violence by the gang.
- During trial, government witness Danyon Dowlen testified to a double murder committed by another gang member, Brandon Hardison; Darden’s counsel did not object or move for a mistrial regarding this testimony.
- Darden previously challenged his conviction on direct appeal, but the Sixth Circuit affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error.
- Darden then filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for the lawyers’ failure to object or move for a mistrial based on the inflammatory murder testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failure to object/move for mistrial | Counsel should have objected to inflammatory, prejudicial testimony | Testimony was relevant and admissible; no prejudice | No prejudice shown; objection would likely be overruled; claim fails. |
| Relevance/admissibility of murder testimony | Testimony was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial | Testimony directly supported racketeering charge | Evidence was relevant and admissible under Rule 403; objection would not have succeeded. |
| Deficient performance by trial counsel | Any reasonable lawyer would have objected/moved for mistrial | Failure to object/move was sound trial strategy | Decision not to object was a reasonable strategy; no deficient performance by counsel. |
| Entitlement to certificate of appealability | Reasonable jurists could debate the Court’s ruling | No substantial showing of constitutional violation | Certificate of appealability denied; Court’s analysis not debatable among reasonable jurists. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-pronged standard for ineffective assistance of counsel claims: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500 (2003) (ineffective assistance claims can be brought in § 2255 proceedings)
- Griffin v. United States, 330 F.3d 733 (6th Cir. 2003) (must show prejudice for ineffective assistance on § 2255)
- Campbell v. United States, 364 F.3d 727 (6th Cir. 2004) (court can reject ineffective assistance claims for lack of prejudice alone)