Hale v. U.S.

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his solicitation of crime of violence conviction involving request to kill Dist. Ct. Judge, where defendant alleged that Dist. Ct. had failed to obtain defendant’s personal consent to question venire members outside of his presence (but not outside presence of his counsel). Defendant could not pursue instant claim where he did not object to procedure during trial and did not raise issue on direct appeal. Ct. also rejected defendant’s claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to use his peremptory challenges to excuse as many African-American members of venire as possible, even though defendant argued that removal of African-American jurors would have assisted his defense in light of his racist views, where case law forbids use of race as permissible ground for removing potential jurors.