STEPHEN HUGUELEY v. TONY MAYS, WARDEN - Articles

All Content

STEPHEN HUGUELEY v. TONY MAYS, WARDEN

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Jul 1, 2020

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON BRIEF: Amy D. Harwell, Dee R. Goolsby, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: Richard D. Douglas, OFFICE OF THE TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

Judge(s): BOGGS, GRIFFIN, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee at Jackson

BOGGS, Circuit Judge. Stephen Lynn Hugueley, a death row inmate at Tennessee’s Riverbend Maximum Security Institution, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, which alleged various violations of his constitutional rights. We granted a certificate of appealability on only one issue, whether Hugueley’s counsel at trial was ineffective. In the proceedings below, the federal habeas court concluded that this claim had been procedurally defaulted. Hugueley originally raised the claim in his state post conviction proceedings, but he waived the claim when he decided to voluntarily withdraw his petition. Hugueley now argues that he should have been declared incompetent to withdraw his post conviction petition, and that the state court procedures that determined that he was competent were procedurally deficient under Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (2007). He therefore contends that the court’s ruling of procedural default was incorrect. In the alternative, he argues that his default should be excused under Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012), because his state post conviction counsel was ineffective, and her deficient performance caused his default.

For the following reasons, we reject Hugueley’s arguments and affirm the district court’s denial of his habeas petition.

Attachments: