Murray v. Lozano

Background

Rickey Paul Murray filed this case without a lawyer under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the federal statute that permits a person in state custody to seek habeas relief. One claim alleges ineffective assistance of counsel, meaning that his lawyer’s performance was constitutionally inadequate. Murray specifically alleged that his lawyer did not object when the prosecutor struck one of two possible African American jurors and improperly challenged the other remaining African American juror, resulting in an all-white jury panel. The opinion cites Batson v. Kentucky as the basis for the jury-selection challenge.

Order

The court ordered J. Lozano to file and serve copies of the voir dire transcript—the transcript of jury questioning—and the juror questionnaires within 30 days of the order. The court also granted Murray permission to file a supplemental traverse, meaning an additional response to the respondent’s filing. That response was optional, could not exceed five pages, had to address only the records produced under the order, and could not raise new arguments. Murray was required to file it within 14 days after receiving the records.

Disposition and Effect

The order directed the respondent to supplement the record and granted Murray leave to file a limited supplemental traverse. It did not decide whether Murray’s counsel was ineffective or whether he was entitled to habeas relief. The court stated that the petition would be fully submitted by the supplemental-filing deadline. Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. signed the order.