Shawn Rainer v. Wendy Kelley, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 14080

Background

In 2009 Takina Douglas was stabbed and died; Shawn Rainer was charged with first-degree murder and convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 80 years as a habitual offender.
At a pretrial, unrecorded in-chambers hearing the state’s motion in limine excluded evidence of Douglas’s prior knife-related assaults (including an alleged prior stabbing of Rainer); no transcript of that hearing exists.
Trial counsel did not renew the in-chambers ruling on the record; Rainer did not testify; the jury heard testimony that Rainer said Douglas tripped and fell on a knife but also heard forensic evidence undermining that account.
On post-conviction (Rule 37) petition, the trial judge granted a new trial after taking sworn recollections and concluding the excluded prior-bad-act evidence likely should have been admitted; the court’s written order framed relief as ineffective assistance for failing to preserve/appeal the in-chambers ruling.
The Arkansas Supreme Court reversed (3-justice dissent), holding: the prior-acts evidence was inadmissible under Ark. R. Evid. 405(b) because Rainer’s defense was accident (not character-as-element), so counsel was not ineffective for failing to press a meritless claim; the failure to record the hearing did not amount to fundamental error.
Rainer sought federal habeas under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 alleging denial of due process/right to present a complete defense and ineffective assistance for failing to preserve a due-process claim; the district court denied relief under AEDPA and granted COA only on the due-process claim. This appeal follows.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether exclusion of victim’s prior knife-related acts violated due process by denying a complete defense	Rainer: exclusion prevented presenting a full accident defense and thus denied due process	Director: exclusion was correct under Arkansas evidence law; claim not properly preserved and meritless	Court: Arkansas Supreme Court’s decision denying due-process relief was not an unreasonable application of federal law; claim rejected
Whether trial/appellate counsel were ineffective for not preserving/appealing the in-chambers ruling	Rainer: counsel should have created a record, renewed objections, or appealed, and failing to do so was deficient	Director: counsel cannot be ineffective for not pursuing a meritless issue; record-supplementation remedies existed	Court: counsel not ineffective under Strickland because the excluded evidence was inadmissible and raising it would be meritless
Whether circuit court’s failure to record the in-chambers hearing was fundamental error voiding the judgment	Rainer: lack of record violated Administrative Order and due process; makes relief proper on collateral review	State: unrecorded pretrial rulings do not constitute fundamental error; issue must be raised at trial/appeal	Held: Not fundamental error; the record was sufficiently supplemented and no prejudice shown
Whether AEDPA deference applies and bars federal habeas relief	Rainer: Arkansas Supreme Court did not adequately address a standalone due-process claim	Director: state-court decision adjudicated related claims; AEDPA deference applies and forecloses relief	Court: AEDPA applies; state decision was neither contrary nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law

Key Cases Cited

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000) (AEDPA unreasonable-application standard)
Johnson v. Williams, 568 U.S. 289 (2013) (presumption that state-court rejection adjudicated federal claim on the merits)
State v. Rainer, 440 S.W.3d 315 (Ark. 2014) (Arkansas Supreme Court reversing grant of new trial; evidentiary exclusion proper under Ark. R. Evid. 405(b))
Solomon v. State, 913 S.W.2d 288 (Ark. 1996) (specific instances admissible only where character is an essential element)
McClellan v. State, 570 S.W.2d 278 (Ark. 1978) (character trait must be an operative fact to be admissible)
Dodge v. Robinson, 625 F.3d 1014 (8th Cir. 2010) (counsel not ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim)