Freddie L. McKnight, III v. State of Indiana
1 N.E.3d 193
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- McKnight, pro se, appeals the denial of post-conviction relief following a 2006 cocaine conviction and direct appeal affirmance.
- The State charged McKnight with class A felony dealing in cocaine weighing three grams or more based on a controlled buy involving a cooperating source (Rhymer) and undercover officers.
- McKnight’s post-conviction petitions were heard through 2010–2011; the post-conviction court denied relief.
- McKnight argued ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, improper post-conviction hearing conduct after counsel withdrew, and a Brady violation involving Rhymer’s prior theft conviction.
- The appellate court affirmed, concluding no clear error in the post-conviction court’s ruling; the evidence supported the verdict and alleged deficiencies were unproved or not prejudicial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance—trial counsel’s pretrial investigation of Rhymer | McKnight argues counsel failed to adequately investigate and cross-examine Rhymer. | Court notes counsel conducted an impeachment deposition but McKnight later pled guilty, making further investigation unnecessary. | No deficient performance or prejudice shown. |
| Ineffective assistance—evidence objections (audio recording, scales) | McKnight contends counsel should have objected to the audio recording and scale calibration. | Arguments would not have changed outcome; evidence was admissible and weight lay with the jury. | No reversible error; objections would not have altered the result. |
| Ineffective assistance—appellate counsel’s performance | Appellate counsel failed to raise the perceived trial issues on appeal. | No trial-counsel ineffectiveness established, so failure to raise issues on appeal was reasonable. | Appellate counsel not ineffective; no basis to disturb post-conviction denial. |
| Brady claim—impeachment evidence of Rhymer’s theft conviction | State suppressed impeachment evidence regarding Rhymer. | Impeaching value of the ten-year-old theft conviction was negligible; evidence was cumulative. | No material Brady violation; denial affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilkes v. State, 984 N.E.2d 1236 (Ind. 2013) (post-conviction standard; burden on petitioner; deferential review of facts)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Ward v. State, 969 N.E.2d 46 (Ind. 2012) (appellate-counsel effectiveness; deference to decisions on issues to raise)
- Dearman v. State, 743 N.E.2d 757 (Ind. 2001) (admissibility of recordings; standard of reliability and lack of need for perfect clarity)
- Smith v. State, 829 N.E.2d 64 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (foundational objections to weight evidence; calibration of scales not required to prove admissibility)