Eric Blackmon v. Tarry Williams
823 F.3d 1088
7th Cir.2016Background
- On July 4, 2002 Tony Cox was shot to death in Chicago; two civilian eyewitnesses (Reece and McDowell) later identified Eric Blackmon as the second shooter in photo arrays, a live lineup, and at trial.
- Blackmon was convicted at a bench trial mainly on those identifications and sentenced to 60 years; no physical evidence or motive tied him to the killing.
- Defense presented two alibi witnesses (Wash and Leavy) and one competing eyewitness (Boyd); the trial judge found the State’s identifications credible and rejected the alibi and Boyd.
- Post-conviction, Blackmon discovered additional potential alibi witnesses (multiple barbecue attendees) and two barber-shop employees (Thomas and Webb) who signed affidavits denying Blackmon was one of the shooters; state courts summarily denied relief.
- Blackmon filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 raising ineffective-assistance and actual-innocence claims; the district court denied relief and the Seventh Circuit granted a COA on certain ineffective-assistance issues.
- The Seventh Circuit held trial counsel unreasonably failed to investigate and call additional alibi witnesses (requiring remand for an evidentiary hearing), but declined to excuse procedural default for the separate claim based solely on the barber-shop witnesses’ affidavits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and call additional alibi witnesses | Blackmon: counsel failed to investigate available alibi witnesses whose testimony could have created reasonable doubt | State: counsel had sufficient knowledge of defense theory; additional testimony would be cumulative or weak | Held: State court unreasonably applied Strickland; failure to investigate was deficient and prejudice is likely — remand for evidentiary hearing on investigation and witnesses |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not calling Richard Arrigo | Blackmon: Arrigo would have exculpated him | State: calling Arrigo was strategic risk (inconsistent statements, suspicious ties) | Held: Decision not to call Arrigo was reasonable trial strategy; no Strickland relief on this point |
| Whether newly discovered barber-shop affidavits excuse procedural default (Schlup gateway) | Blackmon: Thomas and Webb are new, reliable evidence showing probable innocence and thus excuse default | State: affidavits are late, possibly unreliable, and insufficient to overcome two independent identifications | Held: The affidavits alone do not satisfy Schlup’s demanding standard; procedural default not excused for the claim based solely on those affidavits |
| Standard of review under AEDPA for state-court Strickland rulings | Blackmon: state court unreasonably applied Strickland; federal court may grant relief under §2254(d)(1) | State: state-court decision was reasonable given deference AEDPA requires | Held: Majority: state court’s summary denial was objectively unreasonable as to alibi-investigation claim and §2254(d)(1) relief warranted; remand for factual development before final relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-part ineffective-assistance standard)
- Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (actual-innocence gateway standard for excusing procedural default)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (deference owed to state-court decisions under AEDPA)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (§2254(d)(1) unreasonable-application framework for Strickland claims)
- House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (clarifies Schlup standard and review of new evidence)
- Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (limits federal review to state-court record under AEDPA in many contexts)
- Mosley v. Atchison, 689 F.3d 838 (7th Cir.) (summary dismissals may be unreasonable; remand for development of factual record)
- Campbell v. Reardon, 780 F.3d 752 (7th Cir.) (counsel’s failure to investigate can be unreasonable; need to assess investigation itself)
- United States v. Bartlett, 567 F.3d 901 (7th Cir.) (discussion of eyewitness ID reliability and weight of multiple IDs)
- Raygoza v. Hulick, 474 F.3d 958 (7th Cir.) (value of additional, disinterested alibi witnesses)