Bomar v. Romanowski
| Decision Date | 05 September 2013 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL NO. 2:12-CV-12225 |
| Parties | JOHN BOMAR, Petitioner, v. KENNETH ROMANOWSKI, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan |
HONORABLE SEAN F. COX
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
John Bomar, ("petitioner"), presently incarcerated at the Macomb Correctional Facility in New Haven, Michigan, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In his pro se application, petitioner challenges his conviction for second-degree murder, Mich. Comp. Laws, § 750.317. For the reasons stated below, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.
Petitioner was originally charged with first-degree premeditated murder. Following a jury trial in the Macomb County Circuit Court, petitioner was foundguilty of the lesser included offense of second-degree murder.
On October 23, 2007, at approximately 9:00 p.m., police responded to a call at an apartment complex in Clinton Township, Michigan involving a domestic violence situation with a person down in the hallway. (Tr. 5/29/08, p. 32). Upon arrival, Officer Correy Bonner discovered the victim lying in the apartment doorway belonging to Raquel Limon. Officer Bonner noticed a large amount of blood on the carpet close to the victim's head and shoulders. The victim took several small gasps of breath until she stopped breathing. Police and responding medical personnel were unsuccessful in their attempts to resuscitate the victim. (Id., pp. 35-37).
Raquel Limon testified that the victim and petitioner lived together in an apartment unit down the hall from her. Raquel and the victim were friendly acquaintances. (Tr. 5/29/08 pp. 62-63). At approximately 9:00 p.m. on the night in question, Raquel was in her kitchen when she heard screaming. Although the screaming began from far away, as the person got closer, the screaming became louder. At this point, Raquel was able to identify the person screaming as being the victim. The victim screamed repeatedly and frantically "Raquel help!" Raquel went to open her door, but had trouble unlocking the deadbolt because of constant pressure against the door, as though a body was pressing against it. When Raquel ultimately unlocked and opened the door, she observed the victim staring at her with blood onthe left side of her face. Raquel saw petitioner standing behind the victim with his hand coming up from the victim's back. When Raquel made eye contact with petitioner, he immediately turned and ran in the direction of his apartment. The victim dropped to the floor. As Raquel checked to see if Grace was still breathing, the police arrived and began to perform CPR on the victim. (Id., pp. 66-70).
Ella Archacki testified that she lives directly across the hall from Raquel Limon. (Tr. 5/29/08, p. 46). At approximately 9:00 p.m. on the night of the stabbing, Ella heard the victim knocking on the door across the hall while repeatedly crying "Help me!" Ella looked out the peephole and witnessed the victim lying on the floor in the hallway. Ella opened the door and was informed by Raquel that petitioner "was behind Grace and hit her." Not realizing the extent of the victim's injuries, Ella walked down the hall towards Grace's apartment, but petitioner was gone. (Id., pp. 51-52).
Dr. Daniel Spitz, the Macomb County Medical Examiner, performed an autopsy of the victim. Dr. Spitz testified that the victim had received 10 stab wounds about the face, head, neck, back, chest and shoulder. Dr. Spitz testified that the cause of death was from a stab wound to the chest with perforation of the left lung and heart. (Tr. 5/29/08, pp. 126-30). The toxicology report indicated that the victim had a blood alcohol level of .01, and had used anti-depressants and a muscle relaxer. (Id., pp. 137-38).
Detective William Furno of the Clinton Township Police Department was the officer in charge of the investigation. (Tr. 5/29/08, p. 109). Det. Furno obtained a search warrant and conducted a search of the victim's and petitioner's apartment, where he found the murder weapon and a bloody washcloth, both with the victim's blood on them, on a dresser in petitioner's bedroom. (Id., pp. 114-15).
Charles Washington testified that he was a bus driver for the City of Detroit. On the evening of October 23, 2007, he was working when petitioner got on his bus. Petitioner informed Washington that he and his lady friend had gotten into an argument at their apartment. Petitioner told Washington that the victim came at him with a knife, they struggled, that during the struggle, they flipped over the couch, and that the knife stuck in her stomach and chest. Petitioner told Washington that he panicked and left the house. Petitioner also indicated that every time his lady friend drank white liquor, she would get violent and get into an argument. Petitioner eventually exited the bus at the Woodward Avenue and State Fair bus stop. (Tr. 5/30/08, pp. 9-14). The next day, Mr. Washington saw petitioner on the television news and contacted the Clinton Township Police Department. Mr. Washington did not see any blood nor did he see a weapon. (Id., pp. 14-21).
Several witnesses testified to an incident which took place between petitionerand the victim on June 30, 2006, in which the victim and petitioner's daughter got into an argument over a cell phone. The victim ordered petitioner to leave their apartment. Petitioner and his daughter got into a car. Petitioner backed his car out, then put it into drive and hit the victim with it. Petitioner ultimately pleaded guilty to a domestic violence charge arising out of this incident. (Tr. 5/30/08, pp. 22-36; 83-95; 97-119).
Petitioner testified in his own defense. Petitioner testified that after pleading guilty to the domestic assault charge in 2006, he had obtained a personal protection order (PPO) against the victim, because she had taken a corkscrew and cut him across his back. Although he filed a police report, he did not press charges. Petitioner further claimed that he obtained the PPO because the victim had thrown a bottle at a neighbor at the apartment complex because petitioner had taken her to pick up a check. On that occasion, the police arrived and escorted the victim off of the property. They also advised petitioner to get the PPO. Petitioner also went to court because the victim and a friend of hers had robbed him in December, 2006. Petitioner claimed that the victim had threatened to throw his things into a dumpster and when he went to retrieve them, the victim began arguing with him and had a friend grab him while she hit him with a baseball bat. (Tr. 5/30/08, pp. 188-97). Petitioner called the police and the victim was arrested. (Id., p. 200). At times when the victim was angry, shewould throw his clothes out or cut them up. Petitioner denied having an affair with a neighbor, even though the victim had accused him of having one. (Id., pp. 203-04).
Petitioner testified that on the day in question, he got up around 5:00 a.m. The victim awoke around 7:30a.m., and sat in front of the television set with a drink in her hand. Mr. Schulz came to the apartment to take petitioner to his probation officer. The victim asked Mr. Schulz for money. When he refused, the victim became angry and picked up a knife. Mr. Schultz left. Mr. Schultz later returned. The victim went to the kitchen, retrieved a butcher knife and a meat cleaver and began to threaten Mr. Schultz again. The victim eventually calmed down and Mr. Schultz gave her $30.00. Petitioner and Mr. Schultz left the apartment and reported to the probation officer. Petitioner returned to the apartment at about 10:30 a.m. The victim was still drinking. Petitioner informed the victim that he was leaving and she started arguing with him. They continued to argue and around noon, the police arrived and petitioner left to get some cigarettes. (Id., pp. 210-13).
When petitioner returned, the victim began arguing with him again. The police were called a second time by a neighbor. The police asked petitioner to leave, which he did for couple hours and then returned. When petitioner returned, the victim began arguing again, so he left to go to the store to buy the victim some items, including clothes. As the victim was trying on the clothing, she started arguing with him again.Petitioner took off his shirt and laid on the bed. The victim told him to leave and opened the front door, but he closed it. (Id., pp. 215-16). Petitioner indicated that he and the victim got into a fight, during which she was stabbed. Petitioner indicated that the victim came at him with a knife and he feared that she was going to cut him. When the victim got close to him, petitioner grabbed the knife from her. Petitioner claimed that he did not intend to kill the victim. (Id., pp. 218-20).
On cross-examination, petitioner admitted that he had lied to the police when he told them that the victim had cut him on the day in question, acknowledging that the victim had, in fact, cut him a week earlier. (Id., pp. 220-21). Petitioner further admitted that he was able to take the knife away from the victim in the hallway, that she hit him so hard it knocked out his dentures, that the victim then ran down the hallway away from petitioner, and that petitioner "took off after her." Petitioner admitted to being angry when he ran after the victim. Petitioner further admitted that his life was no longer in danger after he had disarmed the victim. Petitioner claimed that he began hitting the victim but did not realize that the knife was still in his hand. (Id., pp. 253-263).
Off. Ramlow responded to the apartment complex around 2:30pm on the day in question, in response to a neighbor complaint. Officer Ramlow spoke to the victim, who was having an argument with petitioner. The victim appeared...
To continue reading
Request your trial