Walls v. Buss
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19732
11th Cir.2011Background
- Walls, a Florida death-row inmate, pursued a federal habeas corpus petition under AEDPA.
- In 1987 Walls burglarized a home and killed Alger and Peterson; his recorded confession was introduced at trial.
- During the confession, investigators repeatedly asked Walls about a sexual act; Walls said he did not know; he was not charged with a sexual crime.
- Walls was convicted of felony murder for Alger and both felony and premeditated murder for Peterson; Alger received life, Peterson a death sentence.
- The Florida Supreme Court reversed the first judgments for investigation violations and remanded for a new trial (Walls I).
- On retrial, a peremptory strike of DG, a black juror, was challenged by Walls; the Florida Supreme Court later affirmed upholding the Batson claim rejection (Walls II).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failure to redact confession | Walls argues counsel erred in not seeking redaction. | State contends tactical decision to present full confession was reasonable. | Affirmed: state court decision reasonable; no AEDPA violation. |
| Batson challenge to peremptory strike of DG | Walls claims race-based use of peremptory challenged DG. | State offered race-neutral rationale (DG's discomfort with death penalty) and explained age/hostility as factors. | Affirmed: race-neutral justification upheld; no substantial showing of purposeful discrimination under Batson. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (pleading standard for ineffective assistance; performance and prejudice prongs)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (prohibition on race-based peremptory challenges)
- Bowles v. Sec'y for Dep't of Corr., 608 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2010) (prosecutors may strike non-ardent death-penalty supporters for race-neutral reasons)
- Chandler v. United States, 218 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2000) (strong presumption of reasonable counsel performance; avoid second-guessing strategy)
- Atkins v. Singletary, 965 F.2d 952 (11th Cir. 1992) (admissibility and strategic decisions in capital cases)
- Straight v. Wainwright, 772 F.2d 674 (11th Cir. 1985) (openness with jury can be a reasonable trial strategy)
- McNair v. Campbell, 416 F.3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2005) (credibility of trial court findings in Batson analysis)
- Wainwright v. Goode, 464 U.S. 78 (U.S. 1983) (when multiple reasonable inferences exist, appellate court should not reweigh factual findings)
- Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (U.S. 2011) (AEDPA review of state-court factual determinations)