101304P.pdf   07/31/2013  Norris Holder  v.  United States
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  10-1304
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Wollman, Circuit 
   Judge] 
   Prisoner case - habeas. For the court's opinion affirming Holder's 
   conviction and death sentence, see United States v. Allen, 247 F.3d 741 
   (8th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, Holder v. United States, 539 U.S. 916 
   (2003). Claim that trial counsel was ineffective for conceding Holder's 
   participation in the bank robbery rejected as counsel employed a 
   reasonable trial strategy aimed at sparing Holder's life and Holder has 
   not offered any alternative theory under which he would have been found 
   not guilty given the evidence against him and his admissible confession; 
   even if trial counsel was deficient in failing to call an independent 
   ballistics expert, Holder cannot show any prejudice; concerning Holder's 
   claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the 
   instruction on the pecuniary-gain factor,the claim was properly rejected 
   because Holder cannot show that the jury would not have found the factor 
   if the district court had modified the instruction to meet his concerns; 
   claims that counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately investigate 
   Holder's mental health or have an exam by a trauma expert rejected; 
   failure of the indictment to allege an 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3592(c) statutory 
   aggravating factor was harmless since it is clear that the grand jury, if 
   asked, would have charged one of the factors.