Roger Wheeler v. Thomas Simpson, 779 F.3d 366

Wheeler was sentenced to death in Kentucky after a two-count murder conviction and death-phase), later reviewed on federal habeas review.
The Kentucky trial court excused Juror Kovatch for cause after finding he could not consider the full penalty range, based on a mischaracterization of his answers.
The state supreme court affirmed exclusion of Kovatch, stating for-cause dismissal was appropriate for death-penalty jurors.
The federal district court granted summary judgment on most claims; the Sixth Circuit reversed in part, holding Kovatch’s exclusion unconstitutional and remanding for writ of habeas corpus for the death sentence.
The court reasoned that improper for-cause exclusion of a qualified juror is a structural error requiring reversal, under clearly established federal law.
Other issues raised include admissibility of pregnancy evidence, ineffective assistance claims, prosecutorial misconduct, and jury instructions; the court remanded for writ of habeas corpus as to the penalty phase only.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
For-cause juror exclusion standard applied to Kovatch	Wheeler: Kovatch equivocated but could consider range; exclusion violated Witt/Witherspoon	Wheeler: Kentucky court properly deemed Kovatch biased	Unreasonable application; violate clearly established law; new penalty trial ordered
Pregnancy evidence and due process	Pregnancy references unfairly prejudiced jurors	Evidence admissible under state law; not inherently prejudicial	Not cognizable on federal habeas review; no due process violation shown
Ineffective assistance—shoe evidence and related claims	Counsel deficient for not introducing shoes/expert; prejudice shown	No reasonable probability of different outcome; trial strategy reasonable	No relief on these guilt-phase claims; some claims defaulted or unpersuasive
Prosecutorial misconduct during closing	Comments prejudicial, shifting burden, improper references	Arguments responsive to defense theory; not reasonably prejudicial	No due process violation; claims unpersuasive under AEDPA
Beck/mitigating instructions and proportionality review	Beck instruction required for voluntary intoxication/EMD; proportionality analysis flawed	No error; evidence did not warrant such instructions; proportionality review proper	No relief on Beck/mitigating instruction or proportionality review issues

Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968) (cannot exclude jurors merely for opposition to death penalty unless automatic reversal)
Gray v. Mississippi, 481 U.S. 648 (1987) (per se rule for erroneous for-cause exclusion in death cases)
Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985) (standard for removal for cause: juror’s views must prevent impartial duty)
Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 (1986) (allowing jurors who have reservations if they can defer to law)
Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (2007) (reaffirmed deference to trial court’s voir dire determinations)
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (1980) (necessity of lesser-included offense instructions when warranted)
Hopper v. Evans, 456 U.S. 605 (1982) (due process requires lesser-included instruction only when warranted by evidence)
Gall v. Parker, 231 F.3d 265 (2000) ( Sixth Circuit case cited regarding juror exclusion grounds)
Gray v. Oklahoma (Ross v. Oklahoma referenced), 487 U.S. 81 (1988) (harmless error and structural error considerations in jury composition)