Habeas Relief – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Ross R. Thill v. Reed A. Richardson

Case No.: 20-2965

Officials: MANION, ROVNER, and ST. EVE, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Habeas Relief – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

A Wisconsin jury found Ross Thill guilty of sexual contact with A.M.M., his ex‐girlfriend’s eight‐ year‐old daughter. At trial, A.M.M. testified that Thill had sexually assaulted her, and the prosecution presented forensic evidence corroborating her testimony—Thill’s semen was found on her underwear. Thill’s defense was that his jilted ex‐ girlfriend framed him by saving his semen for over a year, planting it on her daughter’s underwear, and then coaching her to make false accusations. While cross‐examining Thill and in closing arguments, the prosecutor referenced Thill’s failure to tell the police during his initial interview that he believed his ex‐girlfriend had the means or motivation to frame him.

In state postconviction proceedings, Thill argued that the prosecutor impermissibly used his silence after receiving Miranda warnings to impeach him—violating Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976)—and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals concluded Thill had not demonstrated prejudice. Because this conclusion was not contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, we affirm the district court’s denial of habeas relief.

Affirmed

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Associate Corporate Counsel, IP at Amazon.