Hodkiewicz v. Buesgen

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition that challenged series of convictions that concerned defendant’s stalking and assaulting his estranged wife, even though defendant argued that his trial counsel was ineffective by failing to: (1) object to hearsay testimony regarding defendant’s access to Tracfone that was linked to 146 harassing telephone calls received by defendant’s wife; (2) object to hearsay testimony about wife receiving specific call on her work phone; (3) rebut “false” testimony that he had joked that he would be better off if his wife were “underground;” and (4) rebut “misleading” testimony offered to undermine defendant’s alibi witness. Defendant failed to show that there was reasonable probability that result of his trial would have been different because of said alleged errors, where there was strong evidence outside of hearsay testimony that linked defendant to subject telephone, even though defendant was incarcerated when 17 of said calls were made. Moreover, counsel’s failure to rebut testimony that wife received specific phone call was not pertinent to instant convictions. Too, record contained strong evidence that defendant had strangled his wife during divorce and child custody dispute, and defendant’s proffered alibi evidence still left him with opportunity to commit charged assault on his wife.