Leavitt v. Arave
682 F.3d 1138
9th Cir.2012Background
- Leavitt, a convicted Idaho murderer, was sentenced to death and previously litigated this case in Leavitt I (383 F.3d 809) and Leavitt II (646 F.3d 605).
- After the Supreme Court denied certiorari, Leavitt sought Rule 60(b) relief arguing Martinez v. Ryan allows a merits consideration of ineffective-assistance claims.
- In a separate case, Leavitt moved for the Blackfoot Police Department to submit crime-scene blood samples for forensic testing, which the district court denied.
- The Martinez claim requires showing a substantial underlying ineffective-assistance claim; the court held the conditions for remand were not met here.
- The court addressed multiple IAC theories (prosecutorial misconduct objections, knife testimony, questionable jury instructions, and failure to call a serology expert) and a separate testing request, affirming denial in both matters.
- Overall, the opinion affirms the district court’s denial of relief and rejects Leavitt’s requests for further testing under the cited authorities.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Martinez claim is viable where underlying IAC claim is not substantial | Leavitt | Arave | Martinez claim defeated; underlying IAC not substantial |
| Did trial counsel's failure to object to prosecutorial misconduct amount to deficient performance | Leavitt | Arave | No prejudice; ineffective assistance not shown |
| Was admission of girlfriend’s knife testimony prejudicial | Leavitt | Arave | Harmless error; no prejudice |
| Were six jury instructions misstating law and was failure to object deficient | Leavitt | Arave | Not deficient under Strickland; context showed no constitutional violation |
| Can district court compel third-party forensic testing under Rule 60(b) or 18 U.S.C. §3599(f) | Leavitt | Arave | Discovery/testing denied; §3599(f) limits funding only |
Key Cases Cited
- Sexton v. Cozner, 679 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir.2012) (Martinez requires substantial underlying IAC)
- Rhoades v. Henry, 638 F.3d 1027 (9th Cir.2011) (contextual review of jury instruction harms)
- Turner v. Calderon, 281 F.3d 851 (9th Cir.2002) (trial strategy deference in expert testimony decisions)
- Leavitt v. Arave, 646 F.3d 605 (9th Cir.2011) (discusses MRI/neurological evidence; resentencing counsel impact)
- Leavitt v. Arave, 383 F.3d 809 (9th Cir.2004) (early merits addressing IAC and prosecutorial misconduct)
- Cage v. Louisiana, 498 U.S. 39 (U.S.1990) (unlawful definition of reasonable doubt violates due process)
- Reynolds v. United States, 238 F.2d 460 (9th Cir.1956) (longstanding erroneous jury instruction)