Woodson v. Mlodzik

129 F.4th 1036 · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · February 28, 2025 · No. 22-3153

Summary

This Seventh Circuit opinion reviews a federal habeas corpus petition filed by a state prisoner who claimed his sentence was improperly enhanced based on a judge's misidentification of him in a social media video. The court held that new booking photographs introduced for the first time on federal habeas review could not be considered under AEDPA's statutory limits or the narrow actual innocence exception. Applying the deferential standard of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2) to the existing state court record, the court found no unreasonable factual determination and affirmed the district court's denial of habeas relief.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Writing for the Court
Kirsch; RIPPLE; HAMILTON; KIRSCH
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decision date
February 28, 2025
Docket number
22-3153
Procedural posture
Petitioner appealed the denial of his federal habeas corpus petition from the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Standard of review
de novo (unreasonable determination of the facts under 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(2))
Precedential value
published
Parties
Breion Woodson v. Bradley Mlodzik
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

federal habeas corpuspost-conviction reliefactual innocencesentencingcriminal procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedurepost-conviction relief

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court may consider new evidence (booking photos) not presented in state court under the actual innocence exception.
  2. Whether the Wisconsin Court of Appeals’ factual determination was unreasonable under AEDPA standards.

Holdings

  1. The district court properly denied the petition; the actual innocence exception does not permit consideration of new evidence when the claim does not seek to overturn the conviction and the petitioner failed to develop the evidence in state court.
  2. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals did not unreasonably determine the facts; Woodson failed to produce evidence in state court to show misidentification, so the appellate court’s decision was reasonable.

Key quotations

"the deference given to state court decisions under § 2254 ‘reflects the view that habeas corpus is a ‘guard against extreme malfunctions in the state criminal justice systems,’ not a substitute for ordinary error correction.’" (at 5)
"we have no power to layer a miscarriage-of-justice or actual‑innocence exception on top of the narrow limitations already included in § 2254(e)(2)." (at 5)

Factual background

Woodson was convicted of firearm and drug possession and sentenced to 19 years. At sentencing, the trial judge identified Woodson in a social‑media video showing guns and drugs, despite Woodson’s counsel objecting to its relevance. Woodson later produced booking photos showing a different appearance, but the photos were never presented in state court.

Procedural history

Woodson was convicted in Wisconsin state court of firearm and drug possession and sentenced to 19 years. He challenged the sentencing video evidence in state court, was denied a new sentencing hearing, and after exhausting state remedies, filed a habeas petition in federal district court, which was denied. The Seventh Circuit reviewed the denial de novo.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…