Salvador Rodriguez v. Derral Adams

MEMORANDUM

Salvador Rodriguez appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to excuse procedural default. We affirm.

In his habeas petition, Rodriguez claims that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel (“IAC”) by failing to interview two eyewitnesses — Vonree Al-berty and Kenneth Jackson. However, Rodriguez did not timely raise this claim in state court. Therefore, we may not grant habeas relief on Rodriguez’s procedurally defaulted IAC claim, unless Rodriguez “can demonstrate cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law.” Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750 , 111 S.Ct. 2546 , 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991).

In Martinez v. Ryan, the Supreme Court explained that a federal court may find “cause” to excuse a defendant’s procedural default only when certain requirements are met. 566 U.S. 1 , 132 S.Ct. 1309, 1320 , 182 L.Ed.2d 272 (2012). The requirement relevant on this appeal: the underlying IAC claim must be “substantial,” meaning that it has “some merit.” Id. at 1318-19. The standard for determining whether a claim is substantial is comparable to the standard for issuing certificates of appealability, see…