Brown v. Brown

Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his murder conviction on ground that defendant had procedurally defaulted his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to seek limiting instruction when evidence of co-defendant’s confession was admitted into evidence in joint trial, even though record showed that defendant had failed to assert said claim in his state-court petition for post-conviction relief. Holding in Martinez, 132 S.Ct. 1309 and Trevino, 133 S.Ct. 1911 applied to Indiana proceedings so as to potentially excuse instant procedural default, such that defendant was entitled to hearing as to whether his post-conviction counsel was ineffective for failing to raise instant claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to obtain limiting instruction with respect to co-defendant’s confession. Moreover, while co-defendant’s confession was admissible against co-defendant, it was not admissible against defendant, and Ct. could not conclude, under limited record, that decision not to seek limiting instruction was reasonable where evidence presented by prosecutor did not place defendant at murder scene with co-defendant.