472 F. App'x 352
6th Cir.2012Background
- Cornell appeals a district court order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence.
- A jury convicted Cornell of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, using a communication facility to facilitate a felony, and possession/distribution of cocaine.
- District court sentenced Cornell to life imprisonment; appellate and Supreme Court actions are noted as exhausted.
- In 2007 Cornell alleged prosecutor misconduct based on perjured testimony by Agent Clayton and ineffective assistance for not discovering or impeaching such testimony.
- Cornell later added claims concerning Agent Lucas, including prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance related to Lucas, and sought discovery.
- The magistrate recommended denial of discovery regarding Lucas; the district court adopted, with partial certificate of appealability and later reconsideration of discovery issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether discovery regarding Lucas was properly denied | Cornell asserts good cause exists to uncover Lucas’s misconduct history. | State argues no sufficient showing of good cause for Lucas discovery. | Abuse of discretion; district court must allow limited Lucas discovery. |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective regarding Lucas | Cornell contends counsel failed to investigate Lucas and impeach him. | Cornell’s claim lacks sufficient factual support to show deficiency and prejudice. | Remand dependent on discovery; evaluation postponed. |
| Whether prosecutor misconduct occurred regarding Lucas and impeachment evidence | Cornell alleges perjury by Lucas and withholding impeachment material. | State argues no proven misconduct or withholding established at this stage. | Remand for development of facts through discovery; not resolved on current record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Adams v. United States, 622 F.3d 608 (6th Cir. 2010) (legal standard for reviewing §2255 issues; de novo review of legal questions)
- Bracy v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899 (1997) (good cause standard for discovery in §2255 proceedings)
- Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286 (1969) (rules governing discovery in habeas and related proceedings)
- Williams v. Bagley, 380 F.3d 932 (6th Cir. 2004) (standard for ineffective assistance and impeachment evidence in hearings)