Atkins v. Polk

• Decision Date: 16 August 2011
• Docket Number: CIVIL CASE NO. 1:06cv372
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of North Carolina
• Parties: RANDY LYNN ATKINS, Petitioner, v. MARVIN POLK, Warden, Central Prison Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent.

RANDY LYNN ATKINS, Petitioner, v. MARVIN POLK, Warden, Central Prison Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent.

CIVIL CASE NO. 1:06cv372

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION

Signed: August 16, 2011

MEMORANDUM OF

DECISION AND ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Petitioner Randy Lynn Atkins's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. [Doc. 10]. Also before the Court are Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 19] and Petitioner's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 28].

I. STATEMENT OF FACTS

On April 12, 1993, Petitioner was indicted for first degree sexual offense and for the first-degree murder of his eight-month-old son, Lyle James Atkins. State v. Atkins, 349 N.C. 62, 73, 505 S.E.2d 97, 104 (1998). On November 18, 1993, Petitioner pled guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for the dismissal of the sexual offense charge and an agreement by the State not to submit any evidence at sentencing pertaining to the sexual offense charge or to any other sexual offenses purportedly committed by Petitioner. Id. at 73, 505 S.E.2d at 104-05. Following acceptance and entry of Petitioner's guilty plea, a capital sentencing hearing was conducted during the November 29, 1993 Criminal Session of the Superior Court for Buncombe County, before the Honorable Chase Saunders. Id. at 74, 505 S.E.2d at 105. Petitioner was represented by William Auman and Curtiss Graham, both Buncombe County Assistant Public Defenders.

The facts of this case are summarized in the North Carolina Supreme Court's opinion on Petitioner's direct appeal:

Defendant, Lyle, and Lyle's mother were living together . . . at the Lazywood Mobile Home Park in Buncombe County.

Lyle's mother, Ms. Colleen Shank, testified that on the morning of 16 March 1993, she asked defendant to watch Lyle while she washed some clothes. Ms. Shank stated that she heard a "bang." Following the "bang," Ms. Shank heard Lyle begin to cry, and she rushed to the living room. Ms. Shank testified that she then observed defendant hitting Lyle's head against the trailer wall a "few times." She testified further that she saw defendant "swing him [Lyle] very strong" and that "Lyle hit the wall very hard." Ms. Shank tried to comfort Lyle and attempted to lay the child down to rest. However, Lyle soon began to cry, and Ms. Shank noted that he was turning blue. The mother administered CPR and requested that defendant go to a neighbor's home to call 911 for emergency assistance.

Defendant then went to the home of a neighbor and called 911. The 911 operator testified that defendant responded to her questions concerning medical history related to Lyle's emergency by replying "it [Lyle] may have been sick two or three days, but no other." Lyle's mother testified that while waiting for emergency personnel to arrive, defendant told her, "Don't say anything, because I will hurt you too."

Following the arrival of emergency medical personnel, Lyle was transported by helicopter to Mission Memorial Hospital in Asheville. Upon admission to the hospital, Lyle was noted to be limp, not moving, and exhibiting a slow heart rate. The admitting physician noted numerous injuries to the small child, including bruising on both sides of his head, an older bruise on his left elbow, bruising on his right wrist and right hand, a deformation of his pelvis, and an improperly healed fracture of his right lower leg.

A detective from the Woodfin Police Department questioned defendant and Ms. Shank in the waiting room of the hospital. Defendant initially told the officer that Lyle had stopped breathing "because of the Ker-O-Sun heater." Defendant responded to the officer's further inquiry by adding that "a couple of days ago I was holding him, and he slipped and fell, and he hurt his arm." The officer subsequently arrested both defendant and Ms. Shank and transported them to the Buncombe County jail. Later that day, while in police custody, defendant issued a written statement in which he admitted the following:

Today Lyle was crying as I was holding him, and my temper and patience snapped again, as he was crying and crying no matter how soothing and gentle I was. He just kept crying, and I couldn't handle him any more, and I started hitting him on the side of his head and trying to get him to stop crying, and he wouldn't. I kept telling him to stop it, and he wouldn't, and I kept on hitting him with my hand on his head.

Despite aggressive medical efforts to save Lyle's life, he died at Asheville's Mission Memorial Hospital on 18 March 1993.

Id. at 73-74, 505 S.E.2d at 105.

During the capital sentencing proceeding, the State presented evidence in support of one of the statutory aggravating circumstances, namely, that the murder was "especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel." SeeN.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-2000(e)(9). The State Supreme Court summarized the State's evidence as follows:

An experienced pediatric radiologist testified at the sentencing proceeding concerning the extent of injuries suffered by Lyle. The testimony indicated that the eight-month-old infant exhibited the following injuries upon admission to Mission Memorial Hospital on 16 March 1993: healing fracture of the right clavicle, healing bone along the midshaft of the right upper arm, extensive injury of the left upper arm, dislocation of the left elbow, healing bone indicative of a fracture of the right hip, skull fractures and bruising on both the left and right sides, and a compression fracture of the spine. Further testimony indicated that the injuries occurred in at least two episodes of injury to Lyle. The pediatric radiologist estimated that the time of the origin of injuries ranged from four weeks prior to the hospital admission up to within a day of the admission. Several treating physicians also testified at the sentencing proceeding that Lyle exhibited symptoms of "battered child syndrome." The State presented expert testimony by Dr. Cynthia Brown, a pediatrician, who defined a "battered child" as a "child that presents with multiple purposely inflicted injuries that are of varying ages."

Atkins, 349 N.C. at 74-75, 505 S.E.2d at 105-06.

With respect to Petitioner's mental health, evidence was presented during the sentencing phase that in April 1993, Dr. Clabe Lynn diagnosed Petitioner as having a personality disorder and adjustment disorder with a mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct. Id. at 75, 505 S.E.2d at 106.There was also testimony presented from Dr. Joseph Horacek, who testified that it was his opinion that Petitioner suffered from a disassociative identity disorder, also known as multiple personality disorder, as well as an attention deficit disorder. Dr. Horacek also opined that Petitioner exhibited a "learning disability profile." Id. at 87, 505 S.E.2d at 113.

In all, Petitioner presented evidence of twenty-five potential mitigating circumstances in addition to the statutory "catchall" mitigating circumstance, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-2000(f)(9). The jury rejected all of these potential mitigating circumstances except for two, finding that (1) "the Defendant qualifies as having a learning disability due to his IQ variations," and (2) "the Defendant was diagnosed by Dr. Clabe Lynn in April of 1993 as having a personality disorder and adjustment disorder with a mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct." Atkins, 349 N.C. at 75, 505 S.E.2d at 106. On December 8, 1993, the jury unanimously recommended that Petitioner be sentenced to death. Id.

II. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In recounting the procedural history of this case, the Court will refer to those records manually submitted by the Respondent as "Resp't Ex. __"and those records manually submitted by the Petitioner as "Pet'r Ex. __." These citations will include a reference to the relevant page number and/or paragraph number, and where necessary, a description of the particular document cited.¹

A. Direct Appeal

Following entry of judgment and his sentence of death, Petitioner filed an appeal in the North Carolina Supreme Court. During the pendency of that appeal, Petitioner filed a Motion for Appropriate Relief (Pre-Appeal MAR) alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to take steps to accommodate his hearing impairment during his various state court proceedings. [Resp't Ex. 1 at 265 ¶4]. The North Carolina Supreme Court remanded the Pre-Appeal MAR to the Buncombe County Superior Court for an evidentiary hearing and held Petitioner's appeal in abeyance pending the outcome of the Superior Court proceedings. [Id. at 265 ¶5].

As part of the Pre-Appeal MAR, on October 23, 1996, Petitioner filed a Motion for Discovery in the Buncombe County Superior Court. [Resp'tEx. 1 at 242-43]. On November 21, 1996, the Honorable Ronald K. Payne, Superior Court Judge Presiding, entered an Order granting Petitioner access to various investigative and prosecutorial files related to the case. [Id. at 254-55]. On November 27, 1996, Judge Payne entered an Order requiring the State to produce all work product for an in camera review by the Court. [Id. at 252-53]. On December 11, 1996, Judge Payne entered an Order excluding the material provided for in camera review from discovery and requiring the State to continue to comply with the requirements of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). [Id. at 256]. On January 15, 1997, the North Carolina Supreme Court denied Petitioner's petition for a writ of certiorari to review Judge Payne's discovery order. [Id. at 259].

An evidentiary hearing was conducted before the Honorable Forrest Ferrell, who issued an Order on May 16, 1997, denying Petitioner relief on his Pre-Appeal MAR. [Id. at 270]. Subsequently, the North Carolina Supreme Court affirmed Petitioner's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. See State v. Atkins, 349 N.C. 62, 505 S.E.2d 97 (1998). Specifically, the North Carolina Supreme Court found no error in Petitioner's trial or in the denial...