Faryion Wardrip v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director, 976 F.3d 467

Background

Faryion Wardrip committed multiple murders (1984–1986); he pled guilty to one murder and later was tried and sentenced to death for another; sentencing hinged on future-dangerousness and mitigating evidence.
Trial counsel John Curry emphasized Wardrip’s low number of prison disciplinary infractions and did not present broader evidence of Wardrip’s rehabilitative activities (GED, classes, reporter/fireman duties, fundraising).
Wardrip raised ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel (IATC) claims in state habeas; the state habeas court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, relying on Curry’s affidavit that his decision was strategic.
Wardrip sought federal habeas relief; after an evidentiary hearing the district court granted conditional relief based on counsel’s failure to present prison-record mitigation; the State appealed.
After intervening Supreme Court decisions (Pinholster, Martinez, Trevino), the Fifth Circuit reviewed AEDPA deference issues and reversed the district court, holding the state court’s factual determinations reasonable and denying a COA on newly raised claims.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
IATC for failing to investigate/present prison-record mitigation	Curry failed to investigate/present available prison evidence central to his mitigation strategy, rendering performance deficient and prejudicial.	Curry made a reasonable strategic choice to rely on disciplinary record and limited witnesses; state court reasonably credited his affidavit.	Reversed district court: state habeas court’s factual finding of reasonable investigation/strategy was not unreasonable under §2254(d)(2).
Scope of federal evidentiary hearing / consideration of new evidence under AEDPA (Pinholster/Martinez/Trevino)	New procedural rulings (Martinez/Trevino) and evidence produced in federal hearing justified consideration of additional facts.	Pinholster limits federal review to state-court record; Martinez/Trevino do not create a factual predicate for new evidence under §2254(e)(2).	Court did not make a definitive ruling on whether the federal evidentiary hearing was proper but held Pinholster limits scope and that the state-court findings were reasonable on the record.
Prejudice under Strickland (reasonable probability of different outcome)	Additional prison-record evidence likely would have led at least one juror to vote for life, given jury focus on whether "threat to society" meant prison vs public.	Even if additional evidence were admitted, State could have rebutted (e.g., notes about a prison peer) and crimes were especially serious such that outcome likely unchanged.	Fifth Circuit found state court’s conclusion of no prejudice reasonable; majority rejects district court’s prejudice finding. (Concurring judge dissented on merits.)
Certificate of Appealability on new IATC claims (investigator conflict; judge bias) / mandate rule	Wardrip argued Martinez/Trevino permitted exhaustion and consideration of these new IATC grounds.	District court (and majority) invoked the mandate/law-of-the-case to decline reconsideration of issues raised after remand.	COA denied; appellate court found district court did not abuse discretion in declining to consider newly raised claims on remand.

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑part standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003) (reasonableness of investigation informs counsel’s strategic decisions)
Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (2011) (limits federal habeas review under §2254 to the state‑court record)
Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012) (excuses procedural default where state habeas counsel was ineffective)
Trevino v. Thaler, 569 U.S. 413 (2013) (applies Martinez framework in certain state habeas contexts)
Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (deference owed to state court decisions under AEDPA)
Burt v. Titlow, 571 U.S. 12 (2013) (describing double deference in Strickland + AEDPA review)