David Morales v. Rick Thaler, Director, 714 F.3d 295

Morales was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child, receiving 35 and 20 year sentences respectively.
During Morales’s trial, juror Robyn Wyatt, an assistant district attorney, served on the panel after Morales challenged for cause and was not excused; Wyatt testified she could be fair and impartial
Counsel failed to strike Wyatt and did not review her juror questionnaire; this was followed by affidavits stating no strategic reason for not striking
Judge Medrano testified that Roberts said they left Wyatt on the jury; Morales’s counsel admitted not reviewing Wyatt’s sheet and that there was no strategic reason for not striking
Morales moved for a new trial asserting IAC for not using a peremptory strike against Wyatt; the district court and TCCA found no IAC and deferred to credibility determinations
District court granted habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, but on appeal the Fifth Circuit reversed, holding AEDPA’s relitigation bar and state court findings were not objectively unreasonable

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the state courts’ factual findings about trial strategy were objectively reasonable under AEDPA	Morales argues the findings were unreasonable and disregarded key admissions	State courts credited credibility assessments and found a reasonable strategic decision	No; state findings were not objectively unreasonable under AEDPA
Whether trial counsel’s decision to seat Wyatt without a for-cause/strike was IAC under Strickland	Morales argues the decision was deficient performance and prejudicial	State courts held decision was a legitimate trial strategy not constituting IAC	Not IAC; not contrary to clearly established federal law under AEDPA
Whether implied bias/for-cause bias doctrine governs the case and supports reversal	Applying implied bias required reversal and preservation of error	TCCA held strategy allowed leaving Wyatt on juror; implied bias not controlling	Not reversible error; decision not contrary to or unreasonable application of federal law

Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209 (Supreme Court 1982) (implied bias doctrine discussed by Justice O’Connor)
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (Supreme Court 2000) (defines clearly established federal law for AEDPA review)
Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (Supreme Court 2011) (highly deferential standard in § 2254(d) review)
Torres v. Thaler, 395 F. App’x 101 (5th Cir. 2010) (not IAC for strategic decision to seat juror admitted biased)
Virgil v. Dretke, 446 F.3d 598 (5th Cir. 2006) (distinguishable but instructive on strategy vs. actual bias)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court 2004) (Confrontation Clause; strategy vs. evidentiary objections)
Brooks v. Dretke, 444 F.3d 328 (5th Cir. 2006) (implied bias doctrine established; not automatically IAC to seat biased juror)
Patton v. Yount, 467 U.S. 1025 (Supreme Court 1984) (respect for trial court credibility findings in habeas)