Preview:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

KENNETH WORKMAN, Case No. 1:08-cv-00052-EJL Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

RANDY BLADES and LAWRENCE WASDEN, Respondents.

Previously in this habeas corpus matter, the Court dismissed a portion of Claim 1 and Claims 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 in Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Dkt. 34, p. 22.) Respondent has filed an Answer and Brief in Support of Dismissal of the remaining claims: Claim 1 (in part) and Claim 3. (Dkt. 37.) Petitioner has submitted a Traverse, and Respondent has filed a Sur-reply. (Dkts. 38, 39.) These matters are now fully briefed and at issue. The Court finds that decisional process would not be aided by oral argument, and it will resolve this matter on the record after consideration of the parties' written submissions. D. Idaho L. Civ. R. 7.1(d). For the reasons set forth below, the Court concludes that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief, and the Petition will be dismissed.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 1

BACKGROUND In 2001, Petitioner drove his vehicle off of Interstate 84 near Boise and into two pickup trucks that were parked on the side of the road. (State's Lodging F-11, p. 1.) Two people who were standing between the trucks were seriously injured. (Id.) It was later determined that Petitioner had high levels of heroin, amphetamine, and methadone in his blood at the time of the crash. (Id.) The State charged Petitioner with two counts of aggravated driving under the influence (DUI) and one count of possession of heroin. (State's Lodging A-1, pp. 28-29.) The State also filed an Information Part II, alleging that Petitioner was a persistent violator of the law based on two prior felony convictions. (Id. at 38-39.) Petitioner eventually agreed to plead guilty to the two counts of aggravated DUI and to the persistent violator charge, in exchange for the prosecutor's dismissal of the possession count and her agreement to recommend no more than life in prison with 25 years fixed. (State's Lodging A-3, p. 1.) At the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor offered victim impact statements to the court, illustrating how severely the incident had affected the victims' lives. (State's Lodging A-3, pp. 33-38.) While the prosecutor recommended a sentence of life in prison with 25 years fixed, she devoted the bulk of her argument to pointing out Petitioner's lengthy criminal history and the aggravated nature of the offense. (Id. at 39-59.) In response, Petitioner's trial counsel, D.C. Carr, told the court that:

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 2

Anything I say on behalf of my client is empty. This is a god-awful crime, just god-awful. Any kind of argument

Download 43.pdf

Idaho Law