Sanders v. Radtke

Dist. Ct. did not err in summarily denying defendant’s habeas petition that challenged his guilty plea to two counts of attempted first-degree intentional homicide on grounds that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel during his guilty plea hearing, and that he did not knowingly and voluntarily enter into guilty plea. Defendant procedurally defaulted his ineffective assistance of counsel claim by failing to raise issue with Wisconsin Court of Appeals. Moreover, defendant’s claim that he did not knowingly and voluntarily plead guilty was frivolous, where: (1) defendant did not claim that Wisconsin Court of Appeals’s denial of said claim was contrary to or involved unreasonable application of clearly established federal law; (2) defendant did not explain why state-court determination that his guilty plea was voluntary and knowing was unreasonable; and (3) state-court could make determination that defendant’s intellectual limitations did not prevent him from understanding his plea or nature of his criminal charges. Also, Dist. Ct. could summarily dismiss habeas corpus petition without need to examine transcripts or for government to file response.