171 F.3d 877 (3rd Cir. 1999), 96-2115, Matteo v. Superintendent, SCI Albion
|Citation:||171 F.3d 877|
|Party Name:||Anthony N. MATTEO, Appellant v. SUPERINTENDENT, SCI ALBION; The District Attorney of The County of Chester; The Attorney General of The State of Pennsylvania|
|Case Date:||March 24, 1999|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit|
Argued Jan. 30, 1998.
Argued En Banc Nov. 23, 1998.
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Walter M. Phillips, Jr. (Argued), Hoyle, Morris & Kerr, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellant.
Stuart Suss (Argued), Nicholas J. Casenta, Jr., Office of District Attorney, West Chester, PA, for Appellees, The District Attorney of the County of Chester; The Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
James S. Liebman (Argued), Columbia University School of Law, New York, New York; Matthew C. Lawry, Defender Association of Philadelphia, Federal Court Division, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Federal Defender Organization Amici Curiae Appellants, Richard Couglin, Esq., Federal Public Defender, District of New Jersey; James V. Wade, Esq., Federal Public Defender, Middle District of Pennsylvania; Shelley Stark, Esq., Federal Public Defender, Western District of Pennsylvania; Penny Marshall, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, District of Delaware; and Maureen Kearney Rowley, Chief Federal Defender, Federal Court Division, Defender Association of Philadelphia.
Peter J. Gardner (Argued), Donna G. Zucker, Office of District Attorney, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Amici Curiae Appellees, Attorney General, State of Delaware; Attorney General, State of New Jersey; Attorney General, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; District Attorney, Allegheny County; and District Attorney, Philadelphia County.
Argued Jan. 30, 1998.
Before: MANSMANN, COWEN and RENDELL, Circuit Judges
Argued En Banc Nov. 23, 1998.
Before: BECKER, Chief Judge, SLOVITER, STAPLETON, GREENBERG, SCIRICA, NYGAARD, ALITO, ROTH, LEWIS, McKEE, RENDELL and COWEN, Circuit Judges
OPINION OF THE COURT
SCIRICA, Circuit Judge.
Like our sister courts of appeals, we are asked to determine the appropriate standard of review governing petitions for a writ of habeas corpus. Anthony Matteo seeks habeas relief from his state convictions for first degree murder, robbery, theft, and possession of marijuana, contending the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel by using incriminating statements he made in two telephone conversations from prison to an outside informant. In evaluating Matteo's petition, the en banc court must interpret the standard of review provision incorporated into 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), which revised the standard of review for habeas corpus petitions. We hold that the revised statute mandates a two-part inquiry: first, the federal court must inquire whether the state court decision was "contrary to" clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; second, if it was not, the federal court must evaluate whether the state court judgment rests upon an objectively unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court jurisprudence. Applying this analysis, we will affirm the District Court's dismissal of Matteo's habeas petition.
In September 1988, Anthony Matteo was convicted of first degree murder, robbery, theft, and possession of marijuana and subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment on the murder conviction and twenty years' consecutive probation on the robbery conviction. The facts underlying Matteo's convictions were aptly summarized in the opinion of the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County, Pennsylvania:
On January 17, 1988, Patrick Calandriello was found dead in the trunk of his Cadillac which was parked in the North parking lot of the Holiday Inn in Lionville, Pennsylvania. Calandriello had been shot in the head with a .22
caliber rifle and stuffed in the trunk of his own car. Although Calandriello had been known to carry large sums of money, usually in large denominations, no money was found on him. Additionally, he was missing both his apartment and his car keys. Investigators also discovered white cat hairs on Calandriello's pants and a sneaker print on the rear bumper of his car.
The story which ended in Calandriello's death and Matteo's conviction commences in September 1987. Edward Beson, a friend of Calandriello's, testified that Calandriello sought Beson's assistance in storing $20,000 worth of stolen golf carts which Calandriello was soon to acquire. Beson learned from Calandriello that Anthony Matteo was going to obtain these stolen golf carts for Calandriello.
Apparently, the first of two "attempts" to obtain the stolen golf carts, in September of 1987 and January 5, 1988, was unsuccessful. At approximately 11:20 a.m. on January 13, 1988, Calandriello telephoned Beson and stated that he was going to pick up Anthony Matteo at Matteo's house and that he, Calandriello, would be carrying $5,000 or $6,000. Another $15,000 was to be left in the care of Calandriello's friend Richard Ross. Calandriello told Beson that he would meet Beson at 2:00 p.m. that afternoon at Denny's Restaurant, but Calandriello never arrived.
Shortly after noon on January 13, 1998, Calandriello did indeed leave $15,000 in an envelope with Richard Ross at a Roy Rogers Restaurant in Paoli. Calandriello told Ross that he was going to Routes 401 and 113 to pick someone up and that he would return in approximately forty-five minutes to an hour; Matteo's home is nearby this intersection. Ross awaited Calandriello's return for over three hours before he gave up and left the Roy Rogers Restaurant.
Sara Kessock, Calandriello's girlfriend, reported Calandriello missing and an investigation of his disappearance ensued. Eventually, the investigation led to Anthony Matteo, and the police conducted two searches of the Matteo home. The searches revealed the following:
1. In Defendant's room was .22 ammo consistent with the type that killed Calandriello;
2. In Defendant's room were sets of Calandriel lo's car and apartment keys;
3. Under the mattress in Defendant's brother's room was $1,200 in $100 bills;
4. At the Matteo house was a white cat whose h air was consistent with the hairs found on Calandriello's pants;
5. In Defendant's room were sneakers that an F BI expert was "90% to 95% certain" were the sneakers that made the print on Calandriello's car's rear bumper; and
6. Blood was found in the defendant's garage t hat was consistent with Calandriello's and only 3% of the rest of the population.
Crucial testimony was provided by a number of Matteo's friends. First, Timothy Flynn stated that he and the Defendant had gone target shooting on January 10, 1988. Flynn also stated that on the evening of January 13, 1988, the Defendant was carrying a wad of bills and was spending $100 bills.
Next, C. John Stanchina, a longtime friend of the Defendant's, testified that at approximately 2:25 p.m. on January 13, 1988, he picked up the Defendant at the North end parking lot of the Holiday Inn in Lionville. As it would turn out, this was near where Calandriello's frozen body was later discovered.
Finally, Douglas Lubking testified that he had lent the Defendant a .22 rifle in December of 1987. Lubking and the Defendant had been target shooting and Defendant asked Lubking to loan Defendant the rifle so he could practice. Subsequent to his arrest for murder, the
Defendant called Lubking from the Chester County Prison. The Defendant told Lubking that he had hidden Lubking's rifle near the Defendant's home. Defendant asked Lubking to retrieve the .22 rifle and to hide it in Lubking's attic. Defendant also instructed Lubking to tell the police and Defendant's own attorneys that Lubking did not own a .22 rifle. As a bribe, Defendant offered $1,500 worth of cocaine if he would retrieve the gun. As a result of Defendant's instructions, the gun was located by the police on February 1, 1988. It was this same gun which was later identified by Timothy Flynn as the gun with which Defendant had been target shooting on January 10, 1988. This gun was found to be consistent with the type of gun that killed Calandriello.
Commonwealth v. Matteo, 409 Pa.Super. 655, 589 A.2d 1175 (1990).
Of particular importance in this appeal are the telephone conversations between Matteo and Lubking that took place after Matteo's arrest. The evidence in the record shows that on January 28, 1988, Matteo called Lubking from prison and asked him to retrieve the rifle that Matteo had borrowed from Lubking shortly before Calandriello's murder. Matteo told Lubking that he had nothing to do with Patrick Calandriello's murder, but that he had hidden the rifle so that Lubking would not become a suspect. Lubking responded that he wanted to consult with an attorney before deciding what to do. He told Matteo to call him back the following evening at 8:30 p.m.
The next morning, January 29, 1988, Lubking met with an attorney, who advised him to inform the Chester County District Attorney's office of his conversation with Matteo. Lubking did so, meeting with Chester County detectives that afternoon. During that meeting, Lubking provided written consent to let police intercept and record the anticipated phone call from Matteo that night. The detectives instructed Lubking that he was not to ask questions or otherwise elicit information from Matteo.
As expected, Matteo called Lubking around 8:30 that evening. The police recorded the conversation. At trial, Lubking identified the recorded voices as his and Matteo's. The conversation, which need not be...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP