Court Opinion

ID: 9467819
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 01:57:25.015421+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:40:32.744202
License: Public Domain

NORRIS, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result. As I see it, the pivotal issue in this case is whether Myers has made a sufficient showing of “cause” under Wainwright v. Sykes to overcome the bar created by his failure to object to the defective jury instruction in the state trial court or on direct appeal. While Myers’ current constitutional claim may have been “on the frontier of the criminal law” at the time of his trial, I believe the law of presumptions appeared at that time to be so well settled that Myers could reasonably have believed that raising such a claim would be futile. Accordingly, I conclude that Myers had adequate “cause” for his failure to object to the defective jury instruction. See Isaac v. Engle, 646 F.2d 1129 at 1133-1134 (6th Cir. 1980), cert. granted,-U.S.-, 101 S.Ct. 3141,-L.Ed.2d-(1981). A contrary result would, as Judge Pregerson notes in his opinion, “simply encourage defense attorneys to raise on appeal every conceivable constitutional challenge that might some day be accepted — and thus overload their briefs with unmeritorious issues.”