Baker v. Horn

• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
• Writing for the Court: Anita B. Brody
• Citation: Baker v. Horn, 210 F.Supp.2d 592 (E.D. Pa. 2002)
• Decision Date: 31 May 2002
• Docket Number: Civ.A. No. 96-CV-0037.
• Parties: LEE BAKER v. HORN, et al.

210 F.Supp.2d 592

LEE BAKER v. HORN, et al.

Civ.A. No. 96-CV-0037.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

May 31, 2002.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Billy H. Nolas, Stuart B. Lev, Defender Association of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, for plaintiff.

Peter J. Gardner, Thomas W. Dolgenos, Donna G. Zucker, David Curtis Glebe, District Attorney's Office, Philadelphia, PA, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ANITA B. BRODY, District Judge.

On June 25, 1999, Petitioner Lee Baker ("Baker"), a state prisoner convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondents include the Commissioner of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, and the Superintendents of the State Correctional Institutions at Graterford and Rockview ("the Commonwealth"). On August 31, 2001, the Commonwealth filed a motion to dismiss Baker's petition as untimely under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), or in the alternative, a motion to dismiss all claims in the petition that were procedurally defaulted in state court and, therefore, unreviewable in federal court. For the reasons set forth below, I will deny the motion.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
                I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY .................................................595
                  II. DOES AEDPA APPLY AT ALL? ...........................................603
                 III. AEDPA'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS .....................................606
                  IV. RELATION BACK ......................................................609
                   V. STATUTORY TOLLING ..................................................610
                      A. "Properly Filed" ................................................610
                      B. "Pending" .......................................................619
                  VI. EQUITABLE TOLLING ..................................................620
                 VII. EXHAUSTION .........................................................625
                VIII. PROCEDURAL DEFAULT .................................................630
                      A. "Unmistakable Terms" ............................................632
                      B. "Firmly Established and Regularly Followed" .....................635
                

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The following is a chronology of the procedural history relevant to the Commonwealth's motion to dismiss¹:

October 4, 1984          Lee Baker was convicted of first degree murder before the
                                           Honorable Alfred F. Sabo in the Court of Common Pleas of
                                           Philadelphia County
                  January 30, 1985         Judge Sabo sentenced Baker to death
                  February 11, 1985        Baker filed a motion with Judge Sabo to modify his sentence
                                           sentence
                  February 14, 1985        Judge Sabo denied the motion to modify Baker's sentence
                                           without a hearing. As he was automatically entitled, Baker
                                           appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
                

February 3, 1986         The Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County appointed
                                           new counsel to represent Baker
                  July 17, 1986            Baker filed a petition with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to
                                           remand the case to the trial court to address claims of ineffective
                                           assistance of trial counsel
                  November 10, 1986        The Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted Baker's petition to
                                           remand. The case was remanded to Judge Sabo.
                  April 10, 1987           Baker filed a "petition pursuant to the Post-Conviction Hearing
                                           Act" ("PCHA petition of 4/10/87") raising claims of ineffective
                                           assistance of counsel.2
                November 18, 1987        After a hearing, Judge Sabo dismissed Baker's PCHA petition
                                           of 4/10/87. Baker again appealed the original judgment of
                                           sentence of death imposed on 1/30/85, and also appealed Judge
                                           Sabo's dismissal of the petition of 4/10/87.
                  June 17, 1992            The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed both the judgment
                                           of sentence of death and Judge Sabo's dismissal of the petition
                

                           of 4/10/87. See Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 614 A.2d
                                           663 (Pa.1992).
                  Date Unknown             Baker petitioned for reargument.
                  March 2, 1993            The Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied Baker's motion for
                                           reargument.
                  July 30, 1993            Baker filed a pro-se petition for post-conviction relief under
                                           the Pennsylvania "Post Conviction Relief Act" ("PCRA")3
                ("PCRA petition of 7/30/93"). The petition of 7/30/93 was
                                           assigned to the Honorable Joseph Papalini in the Court of
                                           Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.
                  August 23, 1993          Judge Papalini dismissed the petition of 7/30/93 without the
                                           appointment of counsel and without conducting a hearing.
                                           Baker appealed.
                  December 13, 1993        Judge Papalini filed an opinion in support of his August 23,
                                           1993 dismissal of Baker's PCRA petition of 7/30/93.
                  Fall 1994                The Pennsylvania Supreme Court appointed counsel to represent
                                           Baker in the appeal of Judge Papalini's dismissal of
                                           Baker's PCRA petition of 7/30/93.
                  May 8, 1995              The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed Judge Papalini's
                                           dismissal of Baker's PCRA petition of 7/30/93 stating that
                                           "the issue raised by Appellant [Baker] was previously litigated
                                           on direct appeal to this court, and, thus, Appellant is ineligible
                                           for relief under the Post Conviction Relief Act, 42 Pa.C.S.
                                           §§ 9543(3), 9544(a)(2)." Commonwealth v. Baker, 540 Pa. 131,
                                           656 A.2d 116, 116 (Pa.1995). Baker petitioned the United
                                           States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari.
                  October 30, 1995         The U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari.
                  January 3, 1996          Baker filed a motion for appointment of counsel and to proceed
                                           in forma pauperis in federal court. The matter was assigned to
                                           me for adjudication.
                  January 4, 1996          I granted Baker's IFP motion and appointed Billy H. Nolas as
                                           counsel.
                  January 15, 1997         Baker filed a petition in state court entitled "Petition for
                                           Habeas Corpus Relief under Article I, Section 14 of the Pennsylvania
                                           Constitution and for Post-Conviction Relief under
                                           the Post Conviction Relief Act" ("PCRA petition of 1/15/97").
                                           The petition was assigned to Judge Sabo.4
                

PAGE CONTAINED FOOTNOTES

Prior to March 31, 1997  Baker's counsel, Billy Nolas, submitted to Judge Sabo a proposed
                                           order without an accompanying motion which stated in
                                           part:
                                           "[T]he PCRA petition herein [petition of 1/15/97], as supplemented,
                                           is dismissed without prejudice due to on-going litigation
                                           in federal court."5
                March 31, 1997           Judge Sabo did not sign Nolas' proposed order but issues his
                                           own order dismissing Baker's petition of 1/15/97 "as premature
                                           due to on-going litigation in federal court." The order
                                           failed to specify whether the dismissal was with or without
                                           prejudice. The order notified Baker that he had 30 days to
                                           appeal the order.
                  April 9, 1997            Baker filed a motion for rehearing of the petition of 1/15/97
                                           based on newly discovered evidence which Baker contended
                                           disclosed a Batson claim.
                  April 23, 1997                    Baker filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in federal court
                                           under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("federal petition of 4/23/97").
                  April 25, 1997           Baker appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Judge
                                           Sabo's March 31, 1997 dismissal of Baker's PCRA petition of
                                           1/15/97.
                  May 7, 1997              Judge Sabo issued an opinion in support of his March 31, 1997
                                           order dismissing Baker's PCRA petition of 1/15/97. It stated
                                           in part:
                

"The Petition was initially dismissed at the request of defense
                                           counsel as being premature due to on-going litigation in
                                           federal court . . . Even if this action were not barred by federal
                                           litigation . . . the action would still not meet the requisites for
                                           relief under the Post-Conviction Relief Act. The defendant
                                           himself acknowledges that there have been multiple filings
                                           under the Post Conviction Relief Act in this case. Guided by
                                           governing criteria set forth in Commonwealth v. Lawson, 519
                                           Pa. 504, 549 A.2d 107 (1988) for repetitive filings, the Court
                                           finds that the Defendant has failed to set forth a strong prima
                                           facie case that a miscarriage of justice occurred."
                                           Judge Sabo also denied Baker's April 9, 1997 motion for
                                           rehearing based on the Batson claim.
                  May 14, 1997             Baker filed a petition for

...