Pape v. Thaler, No. 11-10008 (5th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CasePetitioner was convicted of two counts of aggravated sexual assault and a single count of indecency with a child for sexually molesting his daughter. The state contended that the district court erred by concluding that it was not constrained by 28 U.S.C. 2254(e)(2) and could conduct an evidentiary hearing to develop the factual basis of petitioner's claim. The state also alleged that the district court erred by relying on evidence from that hearing to conclude that petitioner's trial counsel had violated his constitutional right to effective representation of counsel. The court held that the district court erred in conducting an evidentiary hearing and by relying on evidence from that hearing in light of Cullen v. Pinholster. The court also held that the district court erred in granting the federal habeas petition where counsel adopted reasonable trial strategies and had not acted deficiently under Strickland v. Washington. Accordingly, the court reversed the district court and denied petitioner's petition.
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.