Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s habeas petition, challenging his Wisconsin sexual assault conviction on ground that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise confrontation clause claim under Crawford, 541 U.S. 36, where trial court admitted under exceptions to hearsay rule certain out-of-court statements accusing defendant of sexually assaulting his step-daughter. While Crawford was decided during defendant’s direct appeal, defendant’s appellate counsel could have raised issue during his direct appeal, Moreover, govt. conceded that defendant’s confrontation clause claim was obvious, where defendant had no opportunity to contest out-of-court statements that were testimonial in nature, while claims raised by appellate counsel were weak. Also, there was reasonable chance that Wisc. courts would have concluded that at least some of instant probative statements were inadmissible, and that admission of said statements was not harmless error, where evidence against defendant was not overwhelming absent contested statements.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel