United States Sixth Circuit

Denial of a habeas petition from a conviction for conspiracy to commit armed robbery is affirmed where Michigan state courts did not unreasonably apply United States Supreme Court precedent in holding: 1) that the state trial court adequately dealt with an incident of improper jury contact; and 2) that counsel for co-defendant could "stand in" for defendant's counsel during reinstruction of the jury without violating defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/02/2007
• Published 02/02/2007

Judges

• Before CLAY, ROGERS, and SUTTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Gerhardt A. Gosnell II, Chester, Willcox & Saxbe, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  Janet A. VanCleve, Office of the Attorney General, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Gerhardt A. Gosnell II, Sarah D. Morrison, Chester, Willcox & Saxbe, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  Janet A. VanCleve, Office of the Attorney General, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellee.