United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Oxford Division
MICHAEL P. MILLS, District Judge.
This matter comes before the court on the pro se petition of Cherelle German for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The State has responded to the petition. German has filed a traverse, and the matter is ripe for resolution. For the reasons set forth below, the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus will be denied.
Cherelle German is in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and is currently housed at the Marshall County Correctional Facility in Holly Springs, Mississippi. He was convicted of felony child abuse in the Circuit Court of Lafayette County, Mississippi and sentenced to a term of forty years, with ten years suspended, for a total of thirty years to be served in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections with five years of post-release supervision. S.C.R., Vol. 1, pg. 28 and Vol. 3, pp. 212-213.
German appealed his conviction and sentence to the Mississippi Supreme Court, raising the following grounds for relief (as stated by Petitioner through counsel):
Issue No. 1: Was German's trial rendered unfair by ineffective defense counsel?
Issue No. 2: Whether the trial court should have excluded polygraph evidence?
Issue No. 3: Whether the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence?
The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed German's conviction and sentence. German v. State, 30 So.3d 348 (Miss. App. 2009), reh'g. denied December 8, 2009, cert. denied March 18, 2010 (Cause No. 2008-KA-01277-COA).
German then sought post-conviction collateral relief in the Mississippi Supreme Court alleging that "he was denied due process of law." The Mississippi Supreme Court denied German's request to proceed with a motion for post-conviction collateral relief, stating "[a]fter due consideration, the panel finds that the application should be denied."
4. In his federal habeas petition, German raises the following grounds for relief (restated by the court for the purpose of brevity and clarity):
Ground One. Ineffective assistance of counsel:
A. Failing to object to the admission of testimony from a sheriff's department investigator which amounted to a medical opinion and was based on hearsay;
B. Failing to properly challenge the admission of German's statements to law enforcement;
C. Stipulating that the victim's injuries were profound, a designation which exceeded the State's burden of proof;
D. Failing to submit a jury instruction on circumstantial evidence.
Ground Two. The trial court committed reversible error in allowing testimony regarding a ...