Thompson v. Vanihel

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's habeas petition that challenged his murder and conspiracy convictions on ground that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to: (1) seek suppression of defendant's request for his lawyer following defendant's arrest; (2) object to prosecutor's remarks during closing arguments that made references to defendant's request for his lawyer in violation of Doyle, 426 U.S. 610; and (3) raise error regarding prosecutor's remarks during closing argument in defendant's direct appeal. Defendant failed to establish any prejudice arising out of his trial counsel's alleged errors, since evidence of his guilt on charged offenses was overwhelming, where: (1) police discovered blood on defendant's gloves and jeans; (2) defendant admitted to being with co-defendant, who confessed to charged offenses, on day of murders; (3) co-defendant implicated defendant in said offenses at trial; (4) eyewitnesses placed both defendants near victim's home on day of murders; (5) eyewitnesses placed both defendants at laundromat washing bloody clothes just after murders; and (6) defendant gave implausible alibi at trial. As such, defendant was unable to demonstrate for purposes of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim that, but for trial counsel's alleged errors, there was substantial likelihood that result of trial would have been different.