Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in a case dependent on forensic evidence

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This Court has recognized there are cases that turn on scientific or technical evidence where “the only reasonable and available defense strategy requires consultation with experts or introduction of expert testimony.” Hinton v. Alabama, 571 U.S. 263, 273 (2014). The sole issue at trial in Mr. Cornwell’s case was whether he accidentally backed over his wife in his car or intentionally ran over her while moving forward. There were no eyewitnesses and the determination of guilt or innocence turned entirely on the interpretation of forensic pathology and accident reconstruction evidence. Mr. Cornwell’s trial counsel retained a forensic pathologist and accident reconstructionist, but did not effectively investigate the forensic evidence, thereby preventing counsel from effectively challenging the conclusions of the prosecution’s forensic experts and effectively preparing and presenting countervailing expert evidence. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee held that Mr. Cornwell did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel and, in conflict with Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), assessed each of counsel’s errors in isolation. Mr. Cornwell was also deprived of a fair trial because at all relevant stages of Mr. Cornwell’s trial proceedings, the trial judge was abusing narcotics, engaged in other unethical and criminal conduct and harbored a motive to favor the prosecution to avoid detection of his own illicit behavior. Trial before a biased, incompentent judge is a structrual defect requiring reversal absent a showing of particularized prejudice, but the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee misapplied Bracy v. Gramley, 520 i U.S. 899 (1997), when it determined relief was unwarranted because there was no evidence the trial judge was biased specifically against Mr. Cornwell. The questions presented are: 1. In a case wholly dependent on forensic evidence, did the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee depart from Hinton v. Alabama, 571 U.S. 263 (2014), and Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), by analyzing in isolation each of trial counsel’s errors in effectively investigating, challenging, and presenting expert testimony? 2. Whether the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee misapplied Bracy v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899 (1997), and departed from this Court’s precedent on structural constitutional error by holding that structural error exists with judicial misconduct and bias only when there is proof of actual bias against the defendant? ii