Douglas Coley v. Margaret Bagley
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2692
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Coley, an Ohio prisoner, was convicted of aggravated murder and related offenses and sentenced to death for El-Okdi’s murder; Moore’s kidnapping/robbery/attempted murder were also charged in the same case.
- He pursued state postconviction relief which was denied; he later filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which the district court denied.
- The district court granted a COA on multiple issues including ineffective assistance of counsel and trial court errors.
- The Sixth Circuit reviews habeas decisions de novo on questions of law and AEDPA standards on state-court factual/constitutional determinations.
- Coley asserts multiple ineffective-assistance claims (trial and appellate) and several trial-court issues (grand jury transcript, severance, and prosecutorial misconduct), which the court analyzes under AEDPA and Strickland standards.
- The court ultimately affirms the district court’s denial of relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for not seeking removal of the trial judge | Coley alleges bias existed; removal was required to ensure fairness | No actual bias; judge impartial; no Strickland prejudice | No prejudice; bias not established; claim fails |
| Ineffective assistance for not raising recusal in guilt phase | Counsel should have challenged judge’s recusal or impartiality | No actionable bias; no Strickland prejudice shown | Claim meritless; no prejudice established |
| Prosecutorial misconduct: inconsistent theories between trials | Prosecution used conflicting theories to convict; violated due process | Inconsistent theories, if any, were harmless under applicable law | Harmless error; theories did not affect guilt under Ohio law (aider/abettor vs shooter) |
| Not severing Moore counts from El-Okdi counts | Misjoinder prejudiced rights; affected fairness | Evidence admissible under Rule 404(b) and harmless overall | No reversible error; joinder deemed harmless under Brecht/harmless-error standard |
| Grand jury transcript disclosure denial | Right to grand jury transcript; mandatory disclosure when particularized need shown | State-law standard; no constitutional violation | State-law claim; not contrary to Supreme Court precedent; denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes ineffective assistance standard and prejudice)
- Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (U.S. 2009) (bias standard; probability of bias sufficient for recusal)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (U.S. 2000) (AEDPA review framework; deference to state courts)
- Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. 35 (U.S. 1975) (due-process requires fair tribunal; impartiality presumed)
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (U.S. 1994) (precludes bias from mere exposure to facts; actual bias required not merely inferred)
- In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133 (U.S. 1955) (judge as investigator/prosecutor undermines impartiality)
- Bradshaw v. Stumpf, 545 U.S. 175 (U.S. 2005) (inconsistent theories may be harmless; specific Ohio theory applied)