Summary
explaining that a decision regarding whether to attempt to impeach a witness "is a matter which calls on counsel's professional judgment and requires him to balance a number of factors, including but not limited to the relative importance of the perceived inconsistencies, the likelihood of whether a witness can explain those inconsistencies, and the possible alienation of jurors by endless disputes concerning what they may consider ultimately inconsequential and time-consuming issues."
Summary of this case from Sandoval v. LumpkinOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-5269, SECTION "K" (3).
November 6, 2007
ORDER
Petitioner Raymond Laugand, a state court prisoner, filed a pro se petition for federal habeas corpus relief seeking to vacate his state court conviction on one count of second degree murder (La.Rev.Stat. 14:30.1) as well as the sentence imposed on that conviction. Petitioner seeks to vacate his conviction on the following grounds:1) trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance; 2) the trial judge denied the defense the opportunity to impeach Brian Mathieu, and 3) the trial judge erred in not allowing the defense to reveal to the jury that Dapper Goff's testimony was not tainted by pending criminal charges for the same crime for which petitioner was on trial; 4) prosecutorial misconduct stemming from the presentation of perjured testimony; and 5) the trial judge erred in failing to declare a mistrial.
The Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Daniel E. Knowles, III who prepared a "Report and Recommendation" (Doc. 17) in which he recommended that Laugand's petition for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed with prejudice. Petitioner timely filed "Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation" (Doc. 19).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation objected to by petitioner. Upon review of the petition, the entire state court record, and the applicable law, the Court concludes that the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are fully supported by the record and the controlling case law. Accordingly, the Court hereby overrules petitioner's objections, approves the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, and adopts the Report and Recommendation as the opinion in this matter. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Raymond Laugand's petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.