Read Cagle v. Branker, 07-6

Dismissal of a petition for writ of habeas corpus in a death penalty case is affirmed over claims that: 1) the absence of newly available evidence from a key witness undermined the jury's capital sentence and entitled petitioner to a new sentencing proceeding; 2) his attorneys' motion to sever constituted ineffective assistance of counsel; 3) his attorneys' approach to mitigation during penalty phase of trial also constituted ineffective assistance; and 4) the lack of a jury instruction as to voluntary intoxication deprived him of a fair trial and sentence.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/17/2008
• Published 03/17/2008

Judges

• Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Milton Gordon Widenhouse, Jr., Rudolf, Widen-House & Fialko, Chapel Hill, North Carolina;  Thomas Franklin Loflin, III, Loflin & Loflin, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant.  Steven Mark Arbogast, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Roy Cooper, Attorney General of North Carolina, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.