Boss v. Ludwick
| Decision Date | 03 May 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. C 11–4014–MWB.,C 11–4014–MWB. |
| Citation | 943 F.Supp.2d 917 |
| Parties | Donald L. BOSS, Jr., Petitioner, v. Nick LUDWICK, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
943 F.Supp.2d 917
Donald L. BOSS, Jr., Petitioner,
v.Nick LUDWICK, Respondent.
No. C 11–4014–MWB.
United States District Court,
N.D. Iowa,
Western Division.
May 3, 2013.
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Rockne Cole, Iowa City, IA, for Petitioner.
Richard J. Bennett, Iowa Attorney General, Des Moines, IA, for Respondent.
MARK W. BENNETT, District Judge.
+-----------------+
¦TABLE OF CONTENTS¦
+-----------------¦
¦ ¦
+-----------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦I. ¦INTRODUCTION ¦922 ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦A. ¦Factual Background ¦922 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦The murder and disposal of the body ¦922 ¦
+----+----+----+------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦Disclosure of the location of the body ¦923 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦B. ¦Procedural Background ¦924 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦State proceedings ¦924 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦Conviction and direct appeal ¦924 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦b. ¦Post–conviction relief proceedings ¦924 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦i. ¦The district court's decision ¦924 ¦
+----+---+---+---+-----+---------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ii. ¦The appellate court's decision ¦928 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦Federal Proceedings ¦930 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦Boss's 2254 Petition ¦930 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦b. ¦Proceedings on the merits ¦931 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦c. ¦Objections to the recommended disposition ¦934 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+-----+--------------------------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦II. ¦LEGAL ANALYSIS ¦934 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦A. ¦Review Of A Report And Recommendation ¦934 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦The applicable standards ¦934 ¦
+----+----+----+------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦De novo review ¦935 ¦
+----+----+----+------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦3. ¦“Clear error” review ¦935 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦B. ¦The Nature Of Boss's Constitutional Claims ¦936 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦Boss's pertinent objections ¦936 ¦
+----+----+----+------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦The underlying constitutional claims ¦936 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦The claims as pleaded and briefed ¦936 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦b. ¦Judge Strand's interpretations ¦937 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦3. ¦Analysis of Boss's objections to the nature of his constitutional claims ¦937 ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦Boss's Objection 1 ¦937 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦b. ¦Boss's Objection 5 ¦938 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦C. ¦The Nature Of Boss's Federal Habeas Claims ¦939 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦Federal habeas review of a state conviction ¦939 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦“Exhausted” and “adjudicated” claims ¦939 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦b. ¦The “adjudicated on the merits” requirement ¦940 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦c. ¦The 2254(d)(1) standards ¦942 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦i. ¦The “contrary to” clause ¦943 ¦
+----+---+---+---+-----+---------------------------------------------+-------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ii. ¦The “unreasonable application” clause ¦943 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦d. ¦The 2254(d)(2) standard ¦943 ¦
+---+---+--+----+---------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦e. ¦The effect of deficiencies in the state court decision ¦944 ¦
+---+---+--+----+---------------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦f. ¦De novo review of issues not reached by the state court ¦944 ¦
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦Boss's federal habeas claims ¦945 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦D. ¦Boss's Objections To The Disposition Of His Claims ¦946 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦1. ¦“Clearly established federal law” for “ineffective assistance” claims ¦946 ¦
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦Strickland's “deficient performance” prong ¦947 ¦
+----+----+---+----+--------------------------------------------------+------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦b. ¦Strickland's “prejudice prong” ¦948 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦2. ¦The rationale for the state court's decision ¦950 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦a. ¦“Deficient performance” ¦950 ¦
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
...To continue reading
Request your trialSubscribers can access the reported version of this case.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see a list of all the documents that have cited the case.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see any amendments made to the case.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see a visualisation of a case and its relationships to other cases. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. You also get a useful overview of how the case was received.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
Subscribers are able to see the list of results connected to your document through the topics and citations Vincent found.
You can sign up for a trial and make the most of our service including these benefits.
Why Sign-up to vLex?
-
Over 100 Countries
Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more.
-
Thousands of Data Sources
Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the world’s leading publishers.
-
Find What You Need, Quickly
Advanced A.I. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research.
-
Over 2 million registered users
Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world.
-
Boss v. Ludwick, 13–2168.
- United States
- U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
- July 25, 2014
...had killed Timothy”; and • Williams believed “the body would have been discovered by investigators at some point.”Boss v. Ludwick, 943 F.Supp.2d 917, 926 (N.D.Iowa 2013). Applying the standard announced in Strickland v. Washington,2 the Iowa Court of Appeals denied post-conviction relief, f...... -
Pension Trust Fund for Operating Eng'rs v. Assisted Living Concepts, Inc.
- United States
- U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin
- May 3, 2013