Wright v. Bowersox, No. 11-3886 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, convicted of two counts of statutory sodomy against two children, appealed the denial of habeas relief. The court concluded that petitioner failed to find support in the record to overcome the presumption that he was competent to stand trial and represent himself; the state court did not unreasonably apply federal law where it identified the correct standard for competency and pointed to facts, testimony, and evidence that reasonably demonstrated that petitioner met that standard; the district court did not err because it failed to consider whether petitioner was competent to waive counsel under the "new standard" set forth in Indiana v. Edwards; even if Edwards was retroactively applicable to this case, it did not change the outcome here; and the district court did not err in refusing to hold an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Prisoner case - habeas. Missouri courts' finding that Wright was competent to stand trial and waive his right to counsel was not unreasonable in light of the evidence and was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law; arguments based on Indiana v. Edwards, 554 U.S. 164 (2008) rejected.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.