David BArnett
David Barnett, Barnett v. Roper, 904 F.3d 623 (8th Cir. 2018) (affirming grant of habeas relief in Barnett v. Roper, No. 4:03CV00614 ERW, 2015 WL 13662176, *78 (E.D. Mo. 2015))
Mr. Barnett was resentenced to life without parole on March 15, 2019, after the 8th Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of habeas relief.
Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel, Penalty Phase
David Barnett won habeas relief in federal court and was resentenced to life without parole on March 15, 2019. Mr. Barnett was convicted and sentenced to death for killing his adoptive grandparents. The District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri found that Mr. Barnett’s trial counsel were ineffective in failing to investigate Mr. Barnett’s biological family background and evidence of sexual abuse at the hands of Mr. Barnett’s foster father. The District Court held that “[a]ny reasonably competent attorney would have realized that pursuing leads related to Mr. Barnett’s biological background (on his mother’s side) was necessary to making an informed choice among possible mitigation arguments.” Barnett v. Roper, No. 4:03CV00614 ERW, 2015 WL 13662176, *78 (E.D. Mo. 2015) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). The failure to do so was prejudicial to Mr. Barnett because “the new and additional evidence presented to this Court significantly altered the amount of mitigation evidence weighing in favor of Mr. Barnett.” Id. at *83. “The increased quantity and detail of the evidence presented before this Court cannot be ignored, as they are directly relevant in determining how much the scales would likely have shifted in favor of Mr. Barnett in the eyes of the jury.” Id. at *84. The district court ordered the State of Missouri to resentence Mr. Barnett to life without parole or grant him a new penalty-phase trial. The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of relief. Barnett v. Roper, 904 F.3d 623 (8th Cir. 2018).
Cause and Prejudice (Ineffective Assistance of Postconviction Counsel as Cause to Overcome Procedural Bar Under Martinez)
The road to relief for Mr. Barnett was procedurally complicated. Mr. Barnett’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim was not adequately raised in state court and the federal court initially denied it as procedurally barred because of the default. The case was ultimately reopened on a Rule 59(e) motion to amend the judgment denying a Rule 60(b) motion based on Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012). In reaching the merits of the underlying claim, the district court concluded that state postconviction counsel was ineffective under Martinez for failing to properly plead the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim in the state post-conviction petition. State post-conviction counsel had asserted a claim of penalty-phase ineffectiveness, but the state pleading was deficient under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 because it failed to identify the witnesses, what their testimony would have been, and whether they would have been available to testify at trial. Barnett v. Roper, 2015 WL 13662176, *74-*76. The district court found these inadequacies to be easily avoidable. Id. The Eighth Circuit held that the district court properly concluded that Barnett had established ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel based on findings supported by the evidence. Barnett, 904 F.3d at 631 (8th Cir. 2018).