Jeronique Cunningham v. Stuart Hudson
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 11838
6th Cir.2014Background
- Cunningham convicted of two murders in Lima, Ohio, and sentenced to death under an accomplice-liability theory.
- Postconviction relief pursued; juror-bias claim centered on foreperson Mikesell allegedly knowing victims' families.
- Affidavits from jurors Freeman and Wobler suggest Mikesell referenced knowing the families and that they were her clients.
- District court allowed limited discovery and depositions; later rulings addressed exhaustion, default, and merit of the claim.
- Appellate court held the juror-bias claim based on relationships to victims’ families is not yet exhausted and remanded to consider stay-abeyance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exhaustion of juror-bias claim | Cunningham argues claim exhausted in state court. | Warden contends state court record lacks this factual basis. | Not exhausted; factual basis not presented to state court. |
| Procedural default | State remedies may still be available to exhaust claim. | Claim procedurally defaulted under state procedures. | Not procedurally defaulted; state processes may still be available. |
| Stay-and-abeyance for mixed petition | Court should stay and allow state exhaustion for unexhausted claim. | Stay-and-abeyance inappropriate; proceed or dismiss. | Remand to district court to determine if stay-and-abeyance is appropriate. |
| Availability of state post-conviction remedies | New trial or second post-conviction petition may be available in Ohio. | Unclear if state remedies would be open or effective. | Ohio remedies may still be available; state courts must determine eligibility. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wagner v. Smith, 581 F.3d 410 (6th Cir. 2009) (exhaustion and stay-and-abeyance considerations for mixed petitions)
- Rust v. Zent, 17 F.3d 155 (6th Cir. 1994) (state corrective process may still be available for exhaustion)
- Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (Supreme Court 2005) (stay and abeyance warranted for mixed petitions when not plainly meritless)
- Clinkscale v. Carter, 375 F.3d 430 (6th Cir. 2004) (exhaustion requirement and procedural posture for state remedies)
- State v. Schiebel, 564 N.E.2d 54 (Ohio 1990) (standard for unavoidably prevented from filing motion for new trial due to juror misconduct)