SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(US)(ca6) 16

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Michael Gardner – Appellant
Versus
United States – Respondent



UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ MICHAEL TAYLOR GARDNER, │ Petitioner-Appellant, │ > No. 23-1388 │ v. │ │ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, │ Respondent-Appellee. │ ┘

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit. Nos. 2:16-cr-20135-1; 2:19-cv-12088—Gershwin A. Drain, District Judge.

Argued: October 29, 2024

Decided and Filed: November 25, 2024

Before: MOORE, COLE, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. _________________

COUNSEL ARGUED: Katherine Clawson, CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant. Nhan Ho, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Kelsey Moore, Kayla Tharp, Andrew S. Pollis, Melissa A. Ghrist, CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellant. Nhan Ho, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellee. _________________

OPINION _________________

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. Michael Gardner prostituted his 17-year-old girlfriend and recorded himself having sex with her. A jury convicted Gardner of sex trafficking a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(1) and (b)(1), and production of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) and (e). The court sentenced him to 240 months’ imprisonment. Gardner No. 23-1388 Gardner v. United States Page 2

unsuccessfully appealed his conviction. He then sought habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court denied his petition, but granted a certificate of appealability as to: (1) whether Gardner’s trial counsel was ineffective for failing to introduce the minor victim’s prior advertisements for sex work as exculpatory or impeachment evidence and (2) whether Gardner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing. For the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM.

I.

Michael Gardner met B.H., the victim, while the two were in high school. Gardner was a senior, and B.H., a freshman. When Gardner moved away that same year, the two lost touch.

A few years later, on August 13, 2015, a Backpage.com account for B.H. was created using B.H.’s email address. Backpage, now defunct, was a classified ads website that was often used in prostitution. From mid to late August, multiple ads were posted from this account, advertising B.H. for prostitution. These ads listed B.H.’s cell phone as the sole contact number.

Later that month, on August 27, 2015, Gardner and B.H. reconnected through Facebook. They started dating soon after, and Gardner recorded a video of himself having sex with B.H. B.H. was seventeen at the time, and Gardner knew it.

On August 28, the day after B.H. and Gardner reconnected on Facebook, Gardner sent a text to B.H. asking, “How much money can I get from you?” R. 107 Trial Tr., PageID 1777. B.H. testified that Gardner eventually became involved in trafficking her for money, though it’s unclear just when. What we do know from the trial record is that, at some point after August 28, Backpage ads ad

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top