Keidel v. Terry
Docket: No. 03-16787
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; June 18, 2004; Federal Appellate Court
Lyle Eugene Keidel, an Arizona state prisoner, appeals the denial of his habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and reviews the case de novo, ultimately affirming the lower court's decision. Keidel raised five claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, which require demonstrating both deficient performance by counsel and resulting prejudice, as outlined in Strickland v. Washington. 1. **Failure to Cross-Examine**: Keidel argues his counsel was ineffective for not cross-examining his daughter, Lori Romaneck, or impeaching her testimony. The court agrees with the state court that this was a reasonable trial strategy given the emotional nature of Romaneck's testimony. 2. **Expert Witness**: He claims ineffective assistance for failing to use an expert witness to challenge Romaneck’s testimony as influenced by psychiatric counseling. The court finds this assertion conclusory and unsupported by evidence of deficient conduct. 3. **Failure to Call Witnesses**: Keidel contends his counsel was deficient for not calling witnesses to discredit Romaneck. However, he fails to demonstrate prejudice by not providing specifics on what these witnesses would have said. 4. **Grand Jury Motion**: Keidel argues counsel was ineffective for not filing a motion for re-determination of probable cause regarding the grand jury charges. The court finds this meritless, noting that the petit jury's guilty verdict confirms there was probable cause. The Arizona court's handling of Keidel's case did not contravene or unreasonably apply established federal law per 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). New claims raised in Keidel's federal habeas petition are deemed unexhausted, rendering federal review inappropriate. The decision is affirmed and is not suitable for publication or citation, following Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.