Robert R. D. Callioux v. Tim Lang, Secretary, Washington State Department of Corrections, et al.

Petitioner Robert Callioux was found guilty by jury in Washington Slate of felony sex offenses, and sent to prison. At trial, Mr. Callioux’s attorney failed to call the key defense wilness whose testimony could have exonerated him. Asserting ineffective assistance of counsel, he appealed, exhausting his stale appellate remedies before secking habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The District Court denied his petition and denied a certificate of appealability (COA). Interpreting the Antiterrorism and Effeetive Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), the District Court deferred to the decision of the Washington State Court of Appeals, which had found no ineffeetive assistance of counsel. The Ninth Circuit denied Mr. Callioux’s motion for a certificate of appealability and then denied his motion for rehearing, holding that Mr. Callioux did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right under 28 U.S.C. § 2258(¢)(2). The questions presented are: 1. Whether the “independent judgment” required of federal courts under Article IIT, as reaffirmed in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 608 U.S. 3869 (2024), renders the deferential standard of review for AEDPA, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), unconstitutional.