Mikell v. Terry, 1:10-cv-00735

Mikell, a prisoner, sought habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 from a 2000 murder conviction in DeKalb County; petition and amendments were supplemented by responses from the Warden and Mikell’s traverse.
Trial evidence tied Mikell to the scene primarily through witnesses who saw a truck similar to his in the motel parking lot and telephone records; a mid-day call with a former mistress and the absence of his own weapon linking to the murder framed the defense.
Two hotel employees (Patel and Magby) offered new testimony that Mikell’s truck was not at the motel and that the victim sometimes visited with other men; a firearms expert (Fite) questioned the state’s barrel-switch theory.
State habeas proceedings, including an evidentiary hearing, concluded the new evidence was not enough to exonerate and that trial/appellate counsel were not ineffectively deficient; the court also found several grounds procedurally defaulted.
The federal court applied the deferential standard under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), upheld the state court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, and denied relief, while noting a COA might issue on specific “new evidence” claims against trial/appellate counsel.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Procedural default of new-evidence claims	Mikell argues the new Patel/Magby and Fite evidence could change the outcome.	State court properly barred these claims as waived and not raised on appeal.	Defaults bar relief; no cause/prejudice shown.
Ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to obtain/present Patel, Magby, and Fite	Counsel’s failure to locate witnesses and hire an expert was deficient and prejudicial.	Counsel’s investigation and strategy were reasonable; no prejudice shown.	No relief; claims procedurally defaulted or lack prejudice.
Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel on direct appeal	Harvey should have raised the new-evidence issues on appeal.	Appellate counsel acted within Strickland’s limits; no viable prejudice shown.	No relief; appellate counsel not ineffective.
Sufficiency of the evidence	Evidence did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.	Jackson v. Virginia standard satisfied by trial record.	Evidence sufficient; no habeas relief.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court 1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel; deficiency and prejudice)
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (Supreme Court 2000) (clarifies review under § 2254(d)(1) and ‘clearly established federal law’)
Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (Supreme Court 2011) (highly deferential standard for federal habeas review; deference to state court findings)
Ylst v. Nunnemaker, 501 U.S. 797 (Supreme Court 1991) (procedural-default doctrine; independence and adequacy of state grounds)
Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722 (Supreme Court 1991) (procedural default and exceptions for cause and prejudice)