719 F.3d 422
5th Cir.2013Background
- Ratliff challenges district court denial of her 28 U.S.C. §2255 motion to vacate her conviction.
- The sole preserved issue is whether counsel’s failure to file a suppression motion was ineffective assistance and rendered her guilty plea involuntary.
- To succeed, Ratliff must show a meritorious suppression motion, unreasonable performance, and prejudice—i.e., that but-for counsel’s failure she would not have pleaded guilty.
- The district court denied on all elements and granted a COA only as to whether the suppression motion would have been meritorious.
- This court vacated the COA and remanded for clarification on whether Ratliff has shown a denial of her Sixth Amendment right to effective counsel and on whether she is entitled to a COA on that issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the suppression motion would have been meritorious | Ratliff | Ratliff | COA on meritorious suppression remanded for clarification |
| Whether Ratliff established ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) in failing to file suppression | Ratliff | Ratliff | Remand for clarification on IAC showing of denial of Sixth Amendment rights |
| Scope and propriety of the COA on multiple elements of the Strickland claim | Ratliff | Ratliff | COA vacated and remanded to clarify which elements are substantial for COA |
Key Cases Cited
- Ward v. Dretke, 420 F.3d 479 (5th Cir. 2005) (standard for Strickland performance and prejudice in habeas context)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (U.S. 2000) (COA issuance requires a substantial showing of a constitutional right denial)
- Blue v. Thaler, 665 F.3d 647 (5th Cir. 2011) (multielement Briseño-type considerations for COA on constitutional claims)
- Berthoff v. United States, 201 F.3d 426 (1st Cir. 1999) (remanding for clarification where COA wording leaves doubt on issues)
- Gonzalez v. Thaler, 132 S. Ct. 641 (2012) (remanding for clarification on COA scope when constitutional issue(s) not clear)
- Phelps v. Alameda, 366 F.3d 722 (9th Cir. 2004) (advisory-opinion problems when COA on merits denied but on procedural issue granted)