John Ashburn v. Jeff Korte
761 F.3d 741
7th Cir.2014Background
- Ashburn was convicted in Illinois for first-degree murder of Rick Muckenstrum; on direct appeal and collateral review, issues were raised about speedy-trial claims, knife evidence, alleged perjured testimony by Dr. Parks, and an accountability jury instruction; the district court denied habeas relief but certified those four issues for appeal; the Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of habeas relief.
- Indictment and timing: indictment June 18, 1993; trial began February 14, 1995 after multiple continuances.
- Knife and scene evidence: a knife, knife box, and purchase receipt were found at Ashburn’s home and admitted at trial; other witnesses corroborated the murder timeline and Ashburn’s involvement.
- Parks testimony: Dr. Parks performed the autopsy and testified at trial; Ashburn alleged Parks lied about timing of death and that his testimony was knowingly false.
- Accountability instruction: jury was instructed on accountability as a theory of liability; indictment charged murder but not explicitly accountability.
- Outcome: the court held no constitutional violations; habeas petition denied and judgment affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speedy-trial claim against appellate counsel | Ashburn argues appellate counsel failed to raise federal speedy-trial violation | State contends claim procedurally defaulted or meritless | Claim denied; no reversible error; no prejudice under Strickland. |
| Admissibility of knife evidence | Ashburn contends knife evidence was irrelevant and prejudicial under due process | State argues any error was harmless | Harmless error; no due process violation given overwhelming evidence. |
| Perjured testimony by Dr. Parks | Parks testified to improper time-of-death conclusions; alleged perjury affected guilt | Differences in testimony were inconsistencies; no Napue violation | No Napue violation; testimony differences did not likely affect verdict. |
| Accountability jury instruction | Instruction violated due process because indictment did not charge accountability | Accountability is permitted under Illinois law; sufficient basis existed | Instruction proper; defendant had notice and evidence supported accountability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) (framework for Sixth Amendment speedy-trial analysis)
- Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (1992) (prejudice considerations in speedy-trial context)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967) (harmless-error standard for constitutional errors)
- Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999) (standard for determining whether error was harmless)
- Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) (prosecutor’s knowing use of false testimony)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (ineffective assistance standard (pre-AEDPA in this context))
- United States v. Adcox, 19 F.3d 290 (7th Cir. 1994) (perjury test for false testimony)
- Johnson v. Williams, 133 S. Ct. 1088 (2013) (rebutting presumption of adjudication on the merits)
- Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (2011) (deference to state-court rulings when adjudicating federal claims)
- Richter v. Johnson, 131 S. Ct. 784 (2011) (presumption of adjudication on the merits in state court)