United States v. Sherman Fields, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14590

Fields escaped federal custody using a jail fire escape key, then killed Suncerey Coleman and later carjacked a hospital employee.
He was tried in 2004 with self-representation, surviving counsel as standby; jury convicted him on all counts and sentenced him to death.
On direct appeal we affirmed; Fields then pursued multiple § 2255 habeas claims alleging ineffective assistance, due process, Brady violations, and actual innocence.
District court denied relief and declined to issue a COA; Fields seeks a COA from the Fifth Circuit, which reviews for debatable conclusions.
The court analyzes each claimed error (IAC, competency, cross-examination, Brady, actual innocence, Allen charge, security, cumulative errors, discovery/evidentiary hearing) and denied a COA on all claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
IAC during penalty phase	Fields contends trial counsel failed to conduct a thorough mitigation investigation.	Fields's counsel reasonably investigated and presented social history and mental health evidence.	No debatable issue; district court's IAC determination is affirmed.
Competency to waive counsel	Fields was mentally ill and incompetent to waive counsel; pretrial inquiry was inadequate.	Fields was competent to waive counsel; evaluation and proceedings were sufficient.	No debatable issue; competence finding stands.
Dry run cross-examination	Dry run of cross-examination violated rights by revealing trial strategy and coercing fielding of questions.	Dry run was necessary to filter improper questions and control proceedings; within district court discretion.	No debatable issue; dry run permissible under circumstances.
Brady violations	Government suppressed immunity scope and notes; failed to correct false testimony.	No suppression or material prejudice; immunity disclosed and testimony not material.	No debatable issue; COA denied on Brady grounds.
Actual innocence and discovery	New evidence could establish innocence; discovery should be allowed.	No good cause for discovery; no substantial doubt about guilt.	No debatable issue; denial of discovery and possible innocence claims affirmed.

Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (2000) (two-part Strickland test and deference to counsel's strategic decisions)
Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003) (mitigation investigation must be thorough; not just rudimentary)
Porter v. McCollum, 558 U.S. 30 (2010) (mitigating evidence weighed against aggravation in death penalty cases)
Trottie v. Stephens, 720 F.3d 231 (2013) (speciﬁcity required for uncalled witnesses; speculative claims fail)
Kalish v. United States, 780 F.2d 506 (5th Cir. 1986) (preclusion of direct appeal issues on collateral review)