Michael McLaughlin v. Adam Laxalt

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Michael Tracy McLaughlin appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Although the district court denied relief on all of Petitioner’s claims, it granted a certificate of appealability on the issue whether Petitioner’s trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to investigate and present a voluntary intoxication defense during Petitioner’s trial. We “review de novo the district court’s denial of [a] petition for a writ of habeas corpus and review its factual findings for clear error,” Smith v. Ryan, 823 F.3d 1270, 1278-79 (9th Cir. 2016).

The Supreme Court of Nevada rejected Petitioner’s claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel (“IAC”) on the merits. Petitioner now presents an “improved” version of that claim, containing new evidence uncovered by his federal habeas lawyer. The Supreme Court of Nevada rejected the new version as successive and untimely, but the claim may still be reviewed by a federal court under the exception to procedural default recognized in Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 , 132 S.Ct. 1309, 1315-16 , 182 L.Ed.2d 272 (2012).

To fit within the Martinez exception, an improved claim must have…