Morse v. Koenig
Decision Date | 01 August 2022 |
Docket Number | 2:21-cv-01667-TLN-KJN P |
Parties | ROBERT TODD MORSE, Petitioner, v. CRAIG KOENIG, Respondent. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 2254. Petitioner challenges his December 4, 2017 conviction for forcible rape and lewd acts upon three children. Petitioner was sentenced to 90 years to life plus six years in state prison. Petitioner raises the following claims: (1) prosecutorial misconduct for misstating the presumption of innocence during closing argument; (2) denial of motion to sever counts 12 and 13 violated his due process rights; (3) admission of prior sexual offenses violated his due process rights; (4) errors were cumulatively prejudicial; (5) insufficient evidence to support conviction on count 1; (6) denial to hear and rule on defendant's motion for a new trial violated his due process rights: (7) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to present witnesses and exculpatory evidence; (8) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file a motion for a new trial based on errors in jury verdict forms; (9) these additional errors were cumulatively prejudicial. After careful review of the record, this Court concludes that the petition should be denied.
On October 16, 2017, a jury found petitioner guilty of forcible rape and lewd acts upon three children. (ECF No. 12-7.) On August 6, 2018, petitioner was sentenced to 90 years to life plus six years in state prison. (Id.)
Petitioner appealed the conviction to the California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. (ECF Nos. 12-10 to 12-11.) The Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction on July 16, 2019. (ECF No. 12-12.)
Petitioner filed a petition for review in the California Supreme Court, which was denied on September 18, 2019. (ECF Nos. 12-13 to 12-14.) He also filed states habeas petitions, which the state courts denied. (ECF Nos. 12-15 to 12-21.)
Petitioner filed the instant petition on September 1, 2021. (ECF No. 1.) Respondent filed an answer on January 21, 2022. (ECF Nos. 11 and 12.)
After independently reviewing the record, this court finds the appellate court's summary accurate and adopts it herein. In its unpublished memorandum and opinion affirming petitioner's judgment of conviction on appeal, the California Court of Appeal for the Third Appellate District provided the following factual summary:
To continue reading
Request your trial