United States v. Daniel Lee, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 8928

Lee and Kehoe were convicted of RICO conspiracy and three murders in aid of racketeering; death penalty sought for both, Lee was sentenced to death, Kehoe to life imprisonment; trial occurred in 1999 with joint defense strategy.
Defense used all 30 peremptory strikes against Caucasian venire members; district court allowed jury to be seated with 9 of 12 African American jurors.
District court noted prosecutors struck 2 African American venire members; defendants did not challenge Batson on behalf of race-based strikes.
Both defendants argued race-based jury selection violated McCollum and Batson; the case later raised issue of whether counsel’s conduct was prejudicial.
Lee challenged the sentence as disproportionate and alleged new DNA evidence undermines guilt; district court denied postconviction relief, findings affirmed on appeal.
Court handled § 2255 proceedings, reviewing de novo the constitutional claims and underlying facts for clear error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether race-based jury selection by defense counsel was ineffective assistance.	Lee claims prejudice from racially biased strategy.	Kehoe/Lee strategy used racially discriminatory strikes.	No prejudice shown; strategy did not deny effective counsel.
Whether McCollum-type errors are structural and presumptively prejudicial.	McCollum error should presume prejudice (structural).	Young controls; not structural; prejudice required.	McCollum error not structural; prejudice required.
Whether Lee's sentence was arbitrarily imposed due to disparity with Kehoe's sentence.	Disparate sentences show arbitrariness.	Differences reflect individualized aggravating/mitigating findings.	No arbitrary imposition; sentences properly weighed.
Whether alleged post-trial DNA evidence undermines guilt.	DNA hair evidence contradicts trial hair.	DNA evidence not exculpatory and not new material for §2255 relief.	Guilt findings not undermined; claims procedurally barred.
Whether aggravating factors used by the jury were improperly applied.	Certain aggravators were improper or unenacted at time.	Arguments raised on expansion certificate; outside scope here.	Issues beyond scope of certificate; aggravators properly considered.

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (racial peremptory challenges against any party violate equal protection)
Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992) (defense racially discriminatory strikes qualify as state action)
Young v. Bowersox, 161 F.3d 1159 (8th Cir. 1998) (McCollum prejudice questions not structural error)
Neder v. United States, 527 U.S. 1 (1999) (structural error presumption not applicable to such claims)
United States v. Paul, 217 F.3d 989 (8th Cir. 2000) (death-penalty proportional review not required)
McGurk v. Stenberg, 163 F.3d 470 (8th Cir. 1998) (prejudice may be presumed in some Strickland contexts)