Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
No. 12-7819
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:11-hc-02074-F)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Derrick
Montrial
Harper,
North
Carolina
state
argues
that
counsel
was
ineffective
for
not
further
233
(4th
application
for
adjudicated
on
Cir.
2003).
habeas
the
relief
merits
federal
on
in
state
court
claim
court
may
that
grant
an
has
been
if
that
only
adjudication:
(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or
involved an unreasonable application of, clearly
established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme
Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a
decision
that
was
based
on
an
unreasonable
determination of the facts in light of the evidence
presented in the State court proceeding.
28 U.S.C. 2254(d).
Harpers
claim
of
overturned
unless
Harper
possibility
fairminded
assistance
establishes
jurists
could
2
that
disagree
should
not
be
is
no
there
that
the
state
courts
decision
conflicts
with
[Supreme
Court]
precedents.
demonstrate
that
counsels
performance
fell
below
an
(1984).
must
Harper
overcome
strong
presumption
that
serious
that
counsel
was
not
functioning
as
the
counsel
Harrington, 131 S.
To establish
counsels
unprofessional
errors,
the
result
of
the
habeas
court
did
not
unreasonably
determine
that
them
his
involvement
in
Williams
and
Hines
murders.
United States v.
we
determined
assistance
conclude
that
by
that
Harpers
failing
to
the
state
habeas
not
court
counsel
did
render
further
investigate
the
be
presented
at
trial,
Harpers
counsel
could
have
better
spent
inculpated Harper.
combatting
the
four
eyewitnesses
who
Cir. 2011); Emmett v. Kelly, 474 F.3d 154, 161 (4th Cir. 2007).
Finally,
we
conclude
that
Harper
has
not
shown
the
eyewitnesses
and
physical
evidence
all
refuted
while
the
other
witness
would
have
admitted
to
being
before
this
court
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED