United States v. Jonathan Toliver
672 F. App'x 689
| 9th Cir. | 2016Background
- Jonathan Toliver was convicted of crimes including counts under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and VICAR; only one witness at trial identified him at the crime scene.
- After trial and on collateral review, a new declaration from the identifying witness’s mother (not presented at trial or on direct appeal) questioned her son’s credibility.
- Toliver filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion asserting, among other things, prosecutorial misconduct for failing to disclose impeachment leads, ineffective assistance of counsel, and that his § 924(c) convictions may be invalid under Johnson v. United States.
- The district court denied relief; Toliver appealed to the Ninth Circuit.
- The Ninth Circuit found the district court abused its discretion by refusing an evidentiary hearing on whether timely disclosure failures prevented Toliver from discovering the mother’s potential impeachment material, and remanded for consideration of possible prosecutorial misconduct.
- The court declined to resolve the Johnson claim, permitting the district court to hear it on remand and denying supplemental briefing pending related appellate guidance; other claims were largely rejected as procedurally defaulted or otherwise without merit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to hold evidentiary hearing re: late-disclosed impeachment lead (witness’s mother) | Toliver: district court should hold a hearing to determine whether government’s untimely disclosures prevented discovery of the mother and thus deprived him of impeachment evidence | Gov: no basis for additional hearing; trial record sufficient | Court: abused discretion; remand for district court to consider prosecutorial misconduct and hold hearing |
| Validity of § 924(c) convictions under Johnson | Toliver: Johnson undermines his § 924(c) convictions | Gov: district court may consider the claim; appellate resolution pending similar issues | Court: did not decide on merits; allowed district court to consider claim on remand; denied supplemental briefing |
| Prosecutorial misconduct / false theory / failure to disclose witnesses | Toliver: government presented false theory, intimidated witnesses, failed to disclose impeachment material | Gov: claims are procedurally defaulted and/or unsupported; Toliver had chance to raise on direct appeal | Court: claims are procedurally defaulted; Toliver cannot show cause and prejudice; denied |
| Jury instruction claim re VICAR directed verdict language | Toliver: jury instructions contained directed-verdict style language that prejudiced jury | Gov: Law of the case and prior appellate rejection of same claim | Court: barred by law of the case; earlier appellate decision stands |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Toliver: counsel’s performance was deficient | Gov: district court held an evidentiary hearing and found performance adequate | Court: no error; record supports district court’s Strickland finding |
Key Cases Cited
- Browne v. United States, 829 F.2d 760 (9th Cir. 1987) (impeachment evidence must be disclosed in time to be of value to defendant)
- McMullen v. United States, 98 F.3d 1155 (9th Cir. 1996) (district court abuse-of-discretion standard for refusal to hold evidentiary hearing)
- Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500 (2003) (claims of ineffective assistance on collateral review are generally not procedurally defaulted)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong deficient performance and prejudice test for ineffective assistance)
- Jingles v. United States, 702 F.3d 494 (9th Cir. 2012) (law-of-the-case application to prior appellate rulings on jury instructions)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (categorical approach to violent felony enhancement that affects predicate-offense analyses)