James Leslie Karis v. Arthur Calderon, Warden, James Leslie Karis v. Arthur Calderon, Warden

Opinion by Judge HUG; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge KLEINFELD

The Warden of the California State Prison, San Quentin, appeals the district court’s order granting in part the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition of James Karis, who was convicted in 1982 of first degree murder with special circumstances, attempted murder, kidnaping, and rape. The district court granted the petition as to the penalty phase of the trial based on counsel’s failure to investigate and present evidence of child abuse and family violence. Karis cross-appeals the *1122 denial of the remainder of the petition. We conclude that the district court properly denied Karis’ claims with regard to the conviction of murder. We further agree with the district court that counsel provided Karis constitutionally ineffective assistance at the penalty phase. Accordingly, we AFFIRM.

FACTS

The evidence produced at the state court trial presented the following facts. On July 8, 1981, Ms. P and Ms. V were taking a brief walk during their midmorning break from their jobs in Placerville, California. At approximately 10:30 a.m., as they were walking under an overpass, a man ordered the women at gunpoint…

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I concur in part I of the majority opinion, as to the guilt phase of the trial, but respectfully dissent as to part II, regarding the penalty phase. We should reverse the district court’s grant of the habeas petition. The jury sentenced this man to death because of his horrible crimes, not because he had a bad lawyer. The majority opinion mistakenly treats counsel’s failure to put on evidence of an abusive childhood as per se ineffective assistance, without the deference to defense counsel’s judgments required by Strickland .v. Washington. 1

I. Ineffective Assistance

Like the majority, I am troubled by the brevity of the penalty phase defense. Sometimes a defense is brief because coun *1142 sel is not prepared. But in this case counsel thoroughly investigated and prepared. The problem was that the investigation turned up little evidence. The shortage of mitigating evidence was because Karis was a very bad man.

The majority opinion makes two central propositions: (1) “failure to investigate the abuse through other family members and witnesses was error of constitutional magnitude,” 2 and (2) “failing to investigate and present the…

283 F.3d 1117 James Leslie KARIS, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Arthur CALDERON, Warden, Respondent-Appellant. James Leslie Karis, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Arthur Calderon, Warden, Respondent-Appellee. No. 98-99025. No. 98-99026. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted December 16, 1999. Filed March 18, 2002. COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED Norman C. Hile, Sacramento, CA, for the petitioner. Paul E. O'Connor, Deputy Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for the respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence K. Karlton, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. Nos. CV-89-00527-JFM, CV-89-00527-LKK-JFM. Before HUG, BROWNING and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Judge HUG; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge KLEINFELD HUG, Circuit Judge: 1 The Warden of the California State Prison, San Quentin, appeals the district court's order granting in part the 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition of James Karis, who was convicted in 1982 of first degree murder with special circumstances, attempted murder, kidnaping, and rape. The district court granted the…