Allen v. United States, No. 14-3495 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, convicted of two charges arising from an armed bank robbery that resulted in the death of a bank security guard, moved to vacate his death sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255 on several grounds. The district court denied petitioner's motion and this court granted a certificate of appealability on one question: whether petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel failed to object to the empaneling of an anonymous jury. The court concluded that counsel’s failure to argue for an extension of the law to forbid the jury procedures in petitioner’s case did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel where, considering the state of the law at the time of trial concerning whether a jury was properly characterized as "anonymous," it was not professionally unreasonable for counsel to forego an objection to the district court’s procedure for identifying the jurors. Furthermore, where a movant unsuccessfully attacked counsel’s performance for failing to anticipate Apprendi v. New Jersey, no evidentiary hearing was necessary to resolve the claim. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Colloton, Author, with Wollman and Melloy, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Habeas. Given the state of the law at the time of Allen's capital murder trial, it was not professionally unreasonable for counsel to forego an objection to the district court's procedure for identifying jurors by number; the district court did not err in denying this habeas petition without an evidentiary hearing.
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.