Crawford v. Cain, et al, No. 20-61019 (5th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Petitioner petitioned for habeas relief for his conviction for rape. Petitioner filed a habeas petition in federal district court, raising thirteen claims. The district court denied Petitioner’s petition but granted Petitioner a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on all thirteen claims. Petitioner timely appealed. Petitioner claimed that his lawyer provided ineffective assistance by failing to raise an Ake claim on direct appeal. Second, Petitioner raised an Ake claim and argues that the claim is not procedurally barred because his appellate counsel’s ineffectiveness establishes cause and prejudice. Third, Petitioner claimed that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the denial of Petitioner’s habeas petition, holding that Petitioner unquestionably raped a 17-year-old girl. Thus, AEDPA and “law and justice” both require denying his request for federal habeas relief. Petitioner presented substantively identical insanity defenses at all three of his trials. At two of his trials, Petitioner presented an expert witness to support his defense. Both juries flatly rejected that Petitioner was insane. And one of the trials involved an incident contemporaneous with the rape, and the same expert Petitioner wanted for the rape trial testified at the assault trial. The State also presented at all three trials two experts who opined that Petitioner was sane. There is thus no colorable reason to think that Petitioner is insane, much less that he is factually innocent.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on May 19, 2023.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on June 29, 2023.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.