Frazier v. Deville, 1:19-cv-00696

Background

Petitioner Brian L. Frazier was convicted by a Rapides Parish jury of manslaughter (lesser included offense of second‑degree murder) and sentenced to 20 years at hard labor; state appellate courts affirmed and the Louisiana Supreme Court denied relief.
On direct review Frazier argued self‑defense, an improper jury instruction regarding flight, and excessive sentence; he also asserted ineffective assistance for failing to object to an instruction and for failing to preserve negligent homicide as a responsive verdict.
Frazier filed state post‑conviction relief alleging several ineffective‑assistance claims; state courts rejected them on the merits or as repetitive, and the Louisiana Supreme Court denied relief under Strickland.
In his federal § 2254 petition Frazier asserted (a) sufficiency of the evidence/self‑defense, (b) excessive sentence, (c) three ineffective‑assistance claims previously litigated, and (d) three unexhausted claims: non‑unanimous jury conviction, counsel’s failure to admit Facebook posts of the victim, and failure to admit a CID supplemental report.
The magistrate judge found the three unexhausted claims are now procedurally defaulted (post‑conviction window lapsed) and not excused by cause/prejudice or actual innocence; the split‑jury claim may be revisited if the Supreme Court grants retroactive relief.
Recommendation: dismiss with prejudice the three procedurally defaulted claims; serve the remaining exhausted claims on respondent for answer.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence / self‑defense	Frazier: evidence showed he acted in self‑defense; conviction unsupported	State: record supports manslaughter verdict	Court will serve this exhausted claim on respondent (not dismissed on default)
Excessive sentence	Frazier: 20 years at hard labor is excessive	State: sentence affirmed on appeal	Claim exhausted; to be served on respondent
Ineffective assistance — trial counsel failed to object to jury instructions/removal of negligent homicide/responsiveness and flight instruction	Frazier: counsel’s failures prejudiced outcome	State: state courts rejected these claims; record did not support negligent homicide verdict and flight instruction was supported; Strickland not met	Claims were previously adjudicated by state courts and remain for federal review (to be served)
Procedural default — non‑unanimous jury, failure to admit Facebook posts, failure to admit CID report	Frazier: federal constitutional violations and counsel ineffective for not admitting evidence; jury non‑unanimity unconstitutional (pending U.S. Supreme Court review)	State: claims unexhausted in state post‑conviction and now time‑barred under Louisiana law; no cause or actual innocence shown to excuse default	Magistrate recommends these three claims be denied and dismissed with prejudice as procedurally defaulted

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Baldwin v. Reese, 541 U.S. 27 (2004) (exhaustion requires fairly presenting federal claim to state courts)
O'Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838 (1999) (exhaustion requires petition to state’s highest court available)
Duncan v. Henry, 513 U.S. 364 (1995) (federal claim must be fairly presented to state courts)
Murray v. Carrier, 477 U.S. 478 (1986) (actual‑innocence gateway to overcome procedural default)
Kuhlmann v. Wilson, 477 U.S. 436 (1986) (actual innocence standard in procedural default context)
Glover v. Cain, 128 F.3d 900 (5th Cir. 1997) (cause and prejudice standard to excuse default)
Bledsue v. Johnson, 188 F.3d 250 (5th Cir. 1999) (procedural default doctrine explained)
Corwin v. Johnson, 150 F.3d 467 (5th Cir. 1998) (requiring a showing of actual innocence to overcome default)