Johnson v. United States, C 09-3064-MWB

• Court: United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
• Parties: ANGELA JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
• Docket Number: No. CR 01-3046-MWB,No. C 09-3064-MWB,C 09-3064-MWB,CR 01-3046-MWB
• Decision Date: 22 March 2012

ANGELA JOHNSON, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

No. C 09-3064-MWB
No. CR 01-3046-MWB

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CENTRAL DIVISION

Date: March 22, 2012

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING PETITIONER'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT FEDERAL CAPITAL CONVICTIONS AND DEATH SENTENCES
TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ..................... 10

A. Factual Background ..................... 10
B. Criminal Proceedings ..................... 16
C. Section 2255 Proceedings ..................... 22
D. Summary Of Claims ..................... 30

II. VIABILITY OF "NEW" CLAIMS IN JOHNSON'S

SECOND AND THIRD AMENDED § 2255 MOTIONS ..................... 38

A. "New" Claims In The Second Amended § 2255 Motion ..................... 39

1. Arguments of the parties ..................... 39

a. The respondent's argument ..................... 39
b. The petitioner's argument ..................... 39
c. The respondent's reply ..................... 42

2. Analysis ..................... 44

a. Deadlines for § 2255 claims ..................... 44
b. Timeliness of amendments ..................... 56

i. Rule 15(a) ..................... 56
ii. Rule 15(b) ..................... 63

Page 2

iii. Rule 15(c) and "relation back." ..................... 68

c. Application of the standards ..................... 72

i. Preliminary matters ..................... 72
ii. The challenged claims ..................... 75

B. The "New" Claim In The Third Amended § 2255 Motion ..................... 87

1. Arguments of the parties ..................... 88

a. The petitioner's argument ..................... 88
b. The respondent's argument ..................... 90

2. Analysis ..................... 92

a. Timeliness ..................... 93
b. Futility ..................... 96
c. Summary ..................... 102

C. Summary Of Claims To Be Considered On The Merits ..................... 102

III. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO JOHNSON'S CLAIMS ..................... 110

A. Standards For § 2255 Relief ..................... 111

1. Scope of the remedy ..................... 111
2. Section 2255 relief in capital cases ..................... 114
3. Appellate review ..................... 116

B. Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel ..................... 116

1. Ineffective assistance of trial counsel ..................... 117

a. Overview ..................... 117
b. Deficient performance ..................... 118

i. Strategic choices ..................... 119
ii. Presumption of adequate representation ..................... 120
iii. Role of ABA standards ..................... 121

c. Prejudice ..................... 124

2. Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel ..................... 126

C. Cumulative Error ..................... 127

1. Arguments of the parties ..................... 128

a. The petitioner's argument ..................... 128
b. The respondent's argument ..................... 131
c. The petitioner's reply ..................... 133

2. Cumulative effect of errors of counsel ..................... 134

a. Rejection in the Eighth Circuit ..................... 137
b. Conflict with Supreme Court precedent ..................... 140
c. Cumulative error vs. multifaceted error ..................... 146

Page 3

i. Strickland and multifaceted error ..................... 146
ii. Williams, Wiggins, and Porter ..................... 150
iii. "Balkanized" review ..................... 153
iv. Extent of multifaceted claims ..................... 156

3. Cumulative effect of other errors ..................... 163
4. Cumulative error and unfairness of the trial ..................... 167
5. The appropriate aggregations of alleged errors ..................... 171

IV. ERRORS IN THE PRETRIAL PHASE ..................... 181

A. Claim 1: Failure To Pursue A Disposition For A Sentence Less Than Death ................. 181

1. Deficient performance ..................... 184
2. Prejudice ..................... 192

a. Whether the petitioner was willing to plead guilty ..................... 193
b. Whether the prosecution would have accepted a
factual proffer that the petitioner was willing to make ... 198
c. Whether the Attorney General would have accepted a plea .................... 201
d. Whether the prosecution ever offered a plea agreement ..................... 202

3. Summary ..................... 205

B. Claim 2: Failure To Preclude A Timely Death Notice ..................... 206
C. Claim 3: Failure To Raise Pre-Trial Meritorious Motions, Objections, And Arguments ........ 208

V. ERRORS IN THE JURY SELECTION PHASE ..................... 210

A. Claim 4: Counsel's Failure To Investigate And Voir Dire Juror No. 55 Adequately ........... 211
B. Claim 5: Juror No. 55's Misconduct ..................... 216
C. Claim 6: Errors Relating To Voir Dire On Pentecostal Religion And Women ............. 219
D. Claim 7: Failure To Raise Timely Motions And Objections ..................... 222

VI. ERRORS IN THE MERITS PHASE ..................... 224

A. Claims Relating To Demeanor And Competence ..................... 225

1. Factual background ..................... 225

Page 4

2. Errors of counsel involving demeanor and competence ................ 228

a. Claim 8: Failure to address the effect of medication ..................... 228

i. Arguments of the parties ..................... 228
ii. Analysis ..................... 231

b. Claim 9: Failure to seek a competency hearing ............... 239

3. Claim 10: Trial while incompetent ..................... 244

B. Claims 11 through 16: Counsel's Errors Relating
To Investigation And Presentation Of A Merits Phase Defense ..................... 245

VII. ERRORS IN THE MITIGATION PHASE ..................... 251

A. Counsel's Errors In Confronting Aggravating Evidence ..................... 252

1. Applicable standards ..................... 252
2. Claim 18: Failure to challenge the prosecution's theory for DeGeus's murder ........ 255

a. Arguments of the parties ..................... 255
b. Analysis ..................... 258

3. Claims 19, 20, and 21: Failure to confront the prosecution's
arguments that Honken was "worse" than Johnson ..................... 259

a. Arguments of the parties ..................... 260
b. Analysis ..................... 263

i. Admissions by the prosecutor ..................... 263
ii. Other evidence that Honken was "worse" than Johnson ..................... 288

4. Claim 22: Failure to confront
evidence of Johnson's threatening manner ..................... 293

a. Arguments of the parties ..................... 294
b. Analysis ..................... 296

5. Untimely allegations of error ..................... 298
6. Aggregate prejudice ..................... 299

B. Prosecutorial Misconduct ..................... 301

1. Claim 26: Failure to correct false
testimony about Honken .............. 302

a. Arguments of the parties ..................... 303
b. Analysis ..................... 306

2. Claim 27: Brady violation ..................... 311

a. The undisclosed evidence ..................... 311
b. Arguments of the parties ..................... 314
c. Analysis ..................... 316

Page 5

3. Claim 28: Inconsistent argument violation ..................... 332

a. Disclaimer and procedural default ..................... 333

i. Arguments of the parties ..................... 333
ii. Analysis ..................... 334

b. The merits ..................... 336

i. Arguments of the parties ..................... 336
ii. Analysis ..................... 338

4. Cumulative prejudice from the prosecutor's misconduct ............. 342

C. Counsel's Errors Involving The Mitigation Evidence Presented ..................... 342

1. Claims 29, 30, and 31: Poorly chosen mitigation witnesses . ..................... 342

a. The witnesses at issue ..................... 342
b. Arguments of the parties ..................... 344
c. Analysis ..................... 345

2. Claim 32: Flawed use of the psychiatric pharmacologist . ..................... 348

a. Arguments of the parties ..................... 348
b. Analysis ..................... 351

3. Claim 33: Untimely allegation of error regarding formulation of mitigating factors ......... 356
4. Aggregate prejudice ..................... 363

D. Counsel's Errors In Investigating, Preparing, And Presenting Mitigation Evidence ........ 364

1. Errors relating to Johnson's mental state at the time of the offenses ..................... 364

a. Applicable standards ..................... 365
b. Claim 34: Failure to investigate and present evidence of
Johnson's mental state at the time of the offenses ..................... 371

i. Arguments of the parties ..................... 371
ii. Analysis ......................... 377

c. Claim 35: Errors relating to Dr. Gelbort ..................... 390

i. Arguments of the parties ..................... 390
ii. Analysis ..................... 393

d. Claim 37: Errors in failing to offer expert and lay
testimony about Honken's influence over Johnson . . 395

i. Arguments of the parties ..................... 395
ii. Analysis ..................... 398

2. Claim 38: Errors relating to statements of Phyllis Proscovec ..................... 402

Page 6

3. Claim 41: Failure to introduce

...