Sign Up for Vincent AI
Reynolds v. Payne
The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge James Moody, Jr. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.
Petitioner Casey Reynolds (“Reynolds”) seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Reynolds is in ADC custody following his 2018 convictions in White County for two counts of kidnapping, aggravated assault on a family or household member, and third-degree domestic battery. He received a total term of 46 years' imprisonment. Reynolds began the process of direct appeal but then filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. That motion was granted in November 2018.
He then sought postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P 37.1, alleging four instances of ineffective assistance of trial counsel: (1) failure to effectively communicate a plea offer and unreasonably recommending that Reynolds reject the offer; (2) failure to investigate and present evidence impeaching the credibility of the victims; (3) failure to investigate and present evidence about the contents of Reynolds' lost cell phone; and (4) failure to adequately cross-examine the victims.
The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and subsequently denied Rule 37 relief. Reynolds appealed, and the Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court in a March 1, 2023 opinion. Reynolds v. State, 2023 Ark.App. 106.
Reynolds now seeks federal habeas corpus relief advancing the four claims of ineffective assistance raised in his Rule 37 proceeding. Respondent Dexter Payne (“Payne”) has responded, contending the petition should be dismissed with prejudice. Doc. No. 6. The Court agrees, and recommends dismissal and denial of relief.
When the state court has ruled on the merits of a petitioner's claims, as with all four claims advanced by Reynolds, a writ of habeas corpus may not be granted unless the state court's decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law as determined by the Supreme Court” or the state court's decision “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), (2). The United States Supreme Court offers guidance in interpreting the statute:
Penry v. Johnson, 532 U.S. 782, 792-93 (citations omitted).
The Arkansas Court of Appeals ably summarized the trial and the Rule 37 proceedings, cited the legal standard to be met, and addressed Reynolds' arguments:
Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting