United States Sixth Circuit

After en banc review, the court vacates an earlier panel decision and affirms the district court's denial of a petition for habeas corpus where: 1) petitioner's sentence was not unconstitutionally arbitrary or disproportionate in relation to that received by the instigator of the murder plot; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioner's request for a hearing on judicial bias; 3) the Ohio Supreme Court's denial of petitioner's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law; 4) the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; and 5) the cumulative effect of the asserted grounds did not violate petitioner's constitutional rights.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/25/2007
• Published 07/25/2007

Judges

• Before:  BOGGS, Chief Judge;  MERRITT, MARTIN, BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, McKEAGUE, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Michael J. Benza, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant.   Daniel R. Ranke, Office of the Attorney General, Capital Crimes Section, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Michael J. Benza, Cleveland, Ohio, David C. Stebbins, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  Daniel R. Ranke, Office of the Attorney General, Capital Crimes Section, Cleveland, Ohio, Elise W. Porter, Office of the Attorney General of Ohio, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellee.