Kareem Jackson v. Margaret Bradshaw
681 F.3d 753
6th Cir.2012Background
- Petitioner Kareem Jackson challenged a district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging a death sentence.
- State charges arising from a 1997 Columbus apartment murder plot included multiple counts of aggravated murder, aggravated robbery, kidnapping, and felonious assault with firearms specifications.
- Trial evidence linked Petitioner to the shootings via testimony from Derrick Boone and Ivana King, and physical evidence including a handgun tied to the scene and other weapons found in the apartment.
- Petitioner was sentenced to death after a penalty phase in Ohio state court; the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed on direct appeal.
- In 2003 Petitioner filed a federal § 2254 petition raising 18 grounds; the district court denied relief in 2007, and this court granted limited relief on Beck-based issues before remanding for factual findings.
- The court ultimately affirmed the district court’s initial denial as to most claims, reversed the remand-order relief, and denied the petition on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel—guilt phase | Failure to call Patterson; failure to hire eyewitness expert; leading questions not objected to. | Counsel's strategic, reasonable decisions; no prejudice shown. | No prejudice; strategies reasonable, no likelihood of different outcome. |
| Ineffective assistance—bias and mitigation preparation | Counsel failed to expose bias of Ivana King; insufficient mitigation investigation and preparation. | Counsel adequately pursued bias; mitigation strategy supported by evidence and investigation. | Not prejudicial; mitigation presentation and bias handling were reasonable. |
| Penalty phase—jury instruction and Beck/Mitts frameworks | Penalty instruction violated Beck by conditioning life sentencing on unanimity to reject death; Mitts II later narrowed Beck applicability. | Instruction did not require unanimity to acquit; Mitts II forecloses Beck relief here. | Instruction constitutional under Mitts II; Beck-based relief denied. |
| Remmer/influence of extraneous events on jurors | Unchallenged extraneous events could bias jurors; Remmer hearing warranted. | Juror assured impartiality; no credible extraneous influence established. | No Remmer error; no showing of actual prejudice. |
| Admission of penalty-phase evidence | DePew restrictions limited evidence; admission of guilt-phase evidence in penalty phase improper. | Ohio law permits repetition of guilt-phase evidence in penalty phase under § 2929.093(D)(1). | Admission was proper under Ohio law; no ineffective assistance. |
Key Cases Cited
- Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (U.S. 1980) (penalty-phase Beck rule re: jury guidance on lesser sentences)
- Mitts v. Bagley, 620 F.3d 650 (6th Cir. 2010) (Beck applicability limited in Mitts II)
- Mitts v. Bagley, 620 F.3d 650 (6th Cir. 2010) (Beck-based relief rejected post-Mitts II)
- Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (U.S. 1980) (jury instruction error when life option is pretunneled)
- Spisak, 130 S. Ct. 676 (2010) (penalty-phase instruction constitutionally reviewed; impact discussed with Mitts II)
- Mills v. Maryland, 486 U.S. 367 (1988) (unanimity and balancing in sentencing considerations)
- Mapes v. Coyle, 171 F.3d 408 (6th Cir. 1999) (unanimity requirement and penalty-phase instruction analysis)