Dibble v. Kink
3:18-cv-00609
S.D. Ill.Jul 6, 2020Background
- Terry Dibble was convicted by a jury in Illinois of first-degree murder (Billy Barker) and sentenced to 45 years; conviction relied mainly on co-defendants/witnesses Preston Arnsperger and Christopher Mathis, who had plea deals.
- The indictment charged first-degree murder; the State announced multiple alternative theories (intentional, knowing, strong probability, and felony murder based on burglary).
- The jury received instructions on all alternative theories, including felony murder predicated on burglary; the jury returned a general verdict and Dibble did not object to the instructions at trial.
- Arnsperger and Mathis pleaded guilty to felony murder and agreed to testify for the State; their plea agreements included promises limiting the State’s exposure in a related Steinhauer death.
- Dibble pursued direct appeal and postconviction relief in Illinois; many claims were found waived or procedurally defaulted, and state courts rejected ineffective-assistance claims on the merits.
- On federal habeas under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the district court denied relief, finding many claims procedurally defaulted and, where considered, the state courts’ rulings reasonable under AEDPA/Strickland standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Felony-murder instruction and general verdict | Dibble: felony-murder instruction based on "burglary" was unsupported because evidence showed residential burglary, so general verdict may rest on an unsupported theory violating due process | State: felony murder based on burglary was a valid theory; indictment need not specify mode; defendant had notice and opportunity to defend; claim waived for failure to object | Waived for procedural default; alternatively no federal error—one-good-count rule permits general verdict where one submitted theory is valid and not unconstitutional |
| Prosecutor vouching / use of prior consistent statements | Dibble: prosecutor vouched for Mathis/Arnsperger and rehabilitated Mathis with prior consistent statements; counsel ineffective for not objecting | State: prosecutor’s comments based on record and reasonable inferences; plea deals do not show motive to lie as suggested; objection would be meritless | Procedurally defaulted as to due-process claim; ineffective-assistance claim rejected on merits (no deficient performance or prejudice) |
| Various ineffective-assistance claims (opening statement, cross-exam, stipulation re: Steinhauer, failure to tender instructions) | Dibble: counsel made multiple errors (conceding guilt/accountability, inadequate impeachment, failing to expose plea deal details, failing to request accomplice-witness instruction) | State: many choices were strategic; counsel prevented prejudicial mention of a related homicide; jury knew witnesses had plea benefits; record does not show counsel deficient or prejudice under Strickland | State courts reasonably applied Strickland; many subclaims procedurally defaulted; where adjudicated, no unreasonable application of federal law or prejudice shown |
| Procedural default / actual innocence gateway & COA | Dibble: defaults should be excused because he is actually innocent of first-degree murder under felony-murder/burglary theory | State: petitioner not entitled to Schlup gateway—no new, reliable evidence showing more likely than not a reasonable juror would have reasonable doubt | Actual-innocence gateway not satisfied; COA denied because reasonable jurists would not debate the court’s procedural and substantive rulings |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes ineffective-assistance standard)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (AEDPA deference to state-court rulings on federal claims)
- McQuiggin v. Perkins, 569 U.S. 383 (actual-innocence gateway for procedural default)
- Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (standard for credible showing of actual innocence)
- House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (clarifies standard for Schlup/actual innocence inquiry)
- Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (limits federal habeas review to state-court record under AEDPA)
- Griffin v. United States, 502 U.S. 46 (one-good-count rule for general verdicts)
- Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (distinguishable precedent concerning legally insufficient theories)
- Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359 (limits on general verdicts when conflicting with constitutional error)
- Skilling v. United States, 561 U.S. 358 (general-verdict problems when a theory is legally invalid)
- Hedgpeth v. Pulido, 555 U.S. 57 (general-verdict analysis where one theory legally invalid)
- Czech v. Melvin, 904 F.3d 570 (Seventh Circuit discussion of multi-theory verdicts under state law)
- Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722 (procedural default doctrine)
- Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (presumption about state-court reliance on federal law when unclear)
- Smith v. McKee, 598 F.3d 374 (Seventh Circuit on independent and adequate state grounds)
- Richardson v. Lemke, 745 F.3d 258 (Seventh Circuit on waiver and habeas review)