McKune v. Bush, 8:17-cv-00189

Petitioner (state prisoner) pleaded guilty in 2004 to first-degree burglary and criminal conspiracy arising from a home burglary that resulted in a murder; sentenced to life.
After exhausting state direct and PCR relief, Petitioner filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in 2017 asserting two ineffective-assistance claims against plea counsel.
Ground One: Petitioner says plea counsel failed to enforce a plea agreement provision that the prosecutor would not oppose a 15-year mandatory-minimum request; victims’ victim-impact statements at sentencing allegedly breached the agreement.
Ground Two: Petitioner contends the prosecutor misstated forensic evidence at sentencing by implying Petitioner entered the home, and plea counsel failed to correct/respond.
The Magistrate Judge recommended granting the State’s summary-judgment motion; the District Court adopted that Report and Recommendation, denied relief, and denied a certificate of appealability.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor breached plea agreement by allowing victims to request life and not explicitly stating "no position" on sentence	Petitioner: victims’ sentencing statements and prosecutor’s conduct violated an agreement not to oppose a 15‑year request; counsel ineffective for not objecting or moving to withdraw plea	Respondent: plea transcript and sentencing transcript show prosecutor made no recommendation; victims have constitutional right to address court; no promise barred victim statements	Court: No breach. Transcript shows prosecutor took no position; victims’ statements not attributable to prosecutor; counsel not ineffective on this ground
Whether plea counsel was ineffective for not correcting prosecutor’s assertion that Petitioner entered the home (forensic evidence)	Petitioner: no forensic evidence he entered the home; counsel failed to rebut prosecutor’s statement, producing prejudice at sentencing	Respondent: record shows plea counsel contested the claim at sentencing; sentencing judge discounted the claim and said it relied on an inconsistent co-defendant; no prejudice shown	Court: No ineffective assistance. Counsel objected and contested the claim; sentencing judge was not persuaded; PCR court’s denial was not unreasonable

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment allocation of burdens)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (AEDPA deference; doubly deferential standard for Strickland claims on habeas)
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (unreasonable application standard under § 2254)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence; quoted re: habeas scope)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (comments on applying Strickland)
Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (certificate of appealability standard)
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (certificate of appealability standard)