Brian D. Frazier v. Michael Meisner

Summary

The court partially granted and partially denied the respondent’s motion to dismiss Brian Frazier’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. The court dismissed with prejudice Frazier’s Fourth Amendment and most ineffective-assistance claims, but allowed claims concerning the destruction of bedsheet and blood evidence and postconviction counsel’s failure to question him about the effect of a potential Miranda violation to proceed. The court ordered further briefing on those two remaining claims.

Holdings

1. The discovery in February 2022 that the bedsheet had been lost or destroyed did not reset the federal habeas limitations period for Frazier's Fourth Amendment and ineffective-assistance claims concerning the search, Miranda issue, and failure to investigate or test evidence, because those claims were based on facts known or discoverable before the destruction was discovered.
2. Frazier's motion for DNA testing under Wis. Stat. § 974.07 did not toll the federal habeas limitations period because it did not directly attack the judgment of conviction.
3. Frazier's later state postconviction motion tolled the federal limitations period for the destruction-of-evidence claims and the claim that postconviction counsel failed to ask whether Frazier would have rejected the plea offer, because the state courts accepted and adjudicated those claims on the merits.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Frazier's Fourth Amendment claims concerning the search warrant, search, and custodial interrogation were timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1).
2. Whether Frazier's ineffective-assistance claims concerning trial counsel and most claims concerning postconviction counsel were timely under § 2244(d)(1).
3. Whether discovery of the destruction of the bedsheet and blood evidence supplied a later factual-predicate date for claims unrelated to the destruction itself.
4. Whether Frazier's Wisconsin motion for DNA testing tolled the federal habeas limitations period.
5. Whether Frazier's later state postconviction motion tolled the limitations period for the claims that the state courts accepted and addressed on the merits.

Disposition

other