Scott Brundage v. James Craig, Warden

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio adopted the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and dismissed Scott Brundage’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. The court held that all grounds for relief were procedurally defaulted and that Brundage had not established cause and prejudice or actual innocence to excuse the defaults. The court also denied Brundage’s motion to amend the petition and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.

Holdings

1. Grounds One through Eleven were procedurally defaulted because Brundage failed to present the claims through Ohio's ordinary appellate review procedures, including discretionary review by the Supreme Court of Ohio where available.
2. Brundage failed to establish cause and prejudice or actual innocence sufficient to excuse his procedural defaults.
3. A freestanding claim of actual innocence is not an independent ground for federal habeas relief in a noncapital case absent an independent constitutional violation.
4. Leave to amend or supplement the petition to add a twelfth claim was denied because the request was made late and the proposed claim challenged the state court's application of state law without establishing a constitutional violation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Brundage's eleven federal habeas claims were procedurally defaulted because he failed to present them through Ohio's ordinary appellate review procedures.
2. Whether cause and prejudice or actual innocence excused the procedural defaults.
3. Whether Brundage could amend or supplement the habeas petition at a late stage to add a due-process claim concerning the denial of a post-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
4. Whether a freestanding claim of actual innocence provided an independent basis for federal habeas relief.

Disposition

dismissed