United States Sixth Circuit

In a conviction of defendant for drug related offenses, the district court's issuance of a conditional writ of habeas corpus on the ground that defendant's attorney was ineffective in failing to advise her of the potential adverse consequences of rejecting the state prosecutor's plea offer, is reversed and defendant's conviction and sentence reinstated where: 1) because the evidence supporting the decision of the Ohio Court of Appeals is at least as strong as the evidence to the contrary, the district court erred in concluding that the result reached by the Ohio Court of Appeals was unreasonable; and 2) the AEDPA requires denial of defendant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus as, even if the decision of the Ohio Court of Appeals was arguably wrong, there is no justification to find its result unreasonable.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/10/2010
• Decided 01/06/2011
• Published 01/06/2011

Judges

• GILMAN

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• M. Scott Criss, Christopher J. Pagan