Sexual Assault-Habeas Corpus

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Karl Nichols v. Lance Wiersma

Case No.: 22-3059

Officials: Hamilton, Brennan, and St. Eve, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sexual Assault-Habeas Corpus

Karl Nichols was convicted in a Wisconsin state court of first-degree sexual assault and sentenced to five years of probation. The conviction stemmed from allegations by a child, M.R.W., who claimed Nichols had touched her inappropriately during a sleepover several years earlier. M.R.W. participated in two forensic interviews, during which she made notes to correct her initial statements. These notes were lost by the prosecution, leading Nichols to argue that the prosecution failed to preserve exculpatory evidence and that his trial counsel was ineffective for not addressing this issue before the trial.

Initially, Nichols obtained relief from the state trial court, which found that the prosecution had acted in bad faith by not preserving the notes and that the notes contained exculpatory evidence. The court vacated Nichols’ conviction and dismissed the case with prejudice. However, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals overturned this decision, ruling that Nichols failed to prove the exculpatory value of the missing notes. Nichols’ petition for review by the Wisconsin Supreme Court was denied.

Nichols subsequently filed a federal habeas corpus petition in the Western District of Wisconsin. The district court denied relief, applying the deferential standard of review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and citing procedural default on the ineffective assistance claim. The Seventh Circuit upheld the district court’s decision, concluding that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals had reasonably determined that the missing notes had no clear exculpatory value and that the prosecution did not act in bad faith. The court also affirmed the procedural default regarding Nichols’ ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

Affirmed.

Decided 07/16/24

Full Text