Gale Marleen Krizka v. State of Tennessee, E2015-02243-CCA-R3-PC

Background

Petitioner Gale Marleen Krizka was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder for the May 2002 death of her husband; sentence: 22 years.
Victim found wrapped in a shawl and plastic tarp, with severe head trauma and neck stab; autopsy and DNA linked blood/stains in Petitioner’s home to the victim.
Police discovered a boat anchor with frayed rope and large blood-stained areas under carpet and couch; cigarette wrapper and other samples matched victim’s DNA.
At trial the court dismissed first-degree murder (insufficient proof of premeditation); jury convicted of second-degree murder based on circumstantial evidence and witness testimony about Petitioner’s prior statements suggesting motive.
Petitioner filed a post-conviction petition claiming ineffective assistance of counsel for (1) failing to obtain/call an expert or other witnesses, and (2) waiving an opening statement; also later raised issues about challenging evidence preservation and cross-examining autopsy testimony.
Post-conviction court denied relief; on appeal the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, finding Petitioner failed to prove deficient performance or prejudice.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance — failure to obtain/call expert witnesses	Krizka: counsel should have retained an expert (e.g., entomologist) or other witnesses to rebut State’s evidence	State: Petitioner failed to present any expert/witness testimony at post-conviction hearing to show what favorable evidence existed; counsel investigated and relied on available TBI evidence	Denied — Petitioner failed to prove counsel was deficient or that she suffered prejudice; no witnesses or experts presented to support claim
Ineffective assistance — failure to call lay witnesses	Krizka: counsel could have found favorable witnesses to support defense	State: Petitioner did not identify or produce such witnesses at post-conviction hearing; claim thus speculative	Denied — claim unsupported; post-conviction proof required and absent
Ineffective assistance — waiver of opening statement	Krizka: counsel’s waiver deprived her of effective advocacy	State: counsel testified waiver was strategic, common in jurisdiction, and the State likewise waived; strategy framed via voir dire	Denied — tactical decision after preparation; Petitioner failed to show deficiency or prejudice
New issues on appeal — failure to challenge evidence preservation and cross-examine autopsy on insect activity	Krizka: counsel should have challenged preservation and questioned Dr. Elkins about maggot/insect evidence	State: these issues were not raised in post-conviction petition or at hearing and thus waived	Denied / Waived — issues not raised below are waived and cannot be raised for first time on appeal

Key Cases Cited

Baxter v. Rose, 523 S.W.2d 930 (Tenn. 1975) (defines standard for attorney competence in Tennessee)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes two-prong test for ineffective assistance: deficiency and prejudice)
Henley v. State, 960 S.W.2d 572 (Tenn. 1997) (post-conviction factual findings afforded deference)
Kendrick v. State, 454 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2015) (strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within wide range of reasonable professional assistance)
Adkins v. State, 911 S.W.2d 334 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1994) (courts will not second-guess reasonable trial strategy)
Black v. State, 794 S.W.2d 752 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990) (claim that counsel failed to present witnesses requires petitioner to produce those witnesses at post-conviction hearing)
Fields v. State, 40 S.W.3d 450 (Tenn. 2001) (post-conviction court’s conclusions of law receive no presumption of correctness)