Daniels v. Kelley, 5:14CV00134 JLH-JTR
| Decision Date | 19 September 2016 |
| Docket Number | No. 5:14CV00134 JLH-JTR,5:14CV00134 JLH-JTR |
| Parties | JAMES E. DANIELS, JR. PETITIONER v. WENDY KELLEY, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction RESPONDENT |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas |
This is a habeas case brought by James E. Daniels, Jr., pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Daniels was convicted in the Circuit Court of Drew County, Arkansas, on one count of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and one count of possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. He was sentenced to a total of 65 years. On direct appeal, he argued, first, that the circuit court abused its discretion in denying his request for a continuance to give him time to hire private counsel to replace his public defender and, second, that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. After the Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed, Daniels filed a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 37 of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure, reiterating his argument that the trial court erred in refusing to grant him a continuance to give him time to hire private counsel to replace the public defender, asserting that the circuit judge was biased against him, and arguing that the public defender was ineffective on several grounds. The circuit judge denied the Rule 37 motion, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed. On the issue of whether Daniels was denied his right to counsel, the Arkansas Supreme Court held in part that the previous decision by the Arkansas Court of Appeals was the law of the case and therefore did not address that issue on the merits.
Daniels' present petition asserts two grounds for relief. First, Daniels argues that the denial of his motion for continuance violated his right to counsel of choice as guaranteed by the sixth and fourteenth amendments. Second, Daniels argues that the public defender who represented him at trial was ineffective. The magistrate judge to whom this case was assigned has recommended that the Court find in favor of Daniels and grant his habeas petition on the question of whether he was denied his sixth amendment right to counsel. Document #17. He also recommended that the Court deny Daniels' claim that the public defender who represented him at trial was ineffective. Id. The State of Arkansas has objected to the magistrate judge's recommendation that the Court find in favor of Daniels on his claim that he was denied his right to counsel. Document #20. Neither party has objected to the recommendation that the Court deny Daniels' claim that the public defender who represented him was ineffective. The Court adopts the recommendation by the magistrate judge that Daniels' claim of ineffective assistance of counsel be denied. For reasons that will be explained, the Court declines to adopt the recommendation that the circuit judge violated Daniels' sixth amendment right to counsel. Daniels' petition will be denied.
According to his testimony at trial, Daniels was a drug dealer living in Little Rock on August 26, 2010, when he received a call from a regular customer from south Arkansas seeking to purchase methamphetamine and marijuana. Document #16 at 232, 244. Daniels' father had died two days earlier, so he initially declined to accommodate that customer, but the customer persisted. Id. at 232-33. Daniels did not have what the customer requested, but he eventually relented and called another drug dealer, Justin Jones, who agreed to sell methamphetamine to Daniels' customer. Id. at 234. Jones' car was "running hot," so Daniels agreed to transport Jones to south Arkansas to deliver the methamphetamine. Daniels also made arrangements to purchase marijuana for resale to the south Arkansas customer. Id. at 235. Daniels picked up Jones, obtained the marijuana, andproceeded to drive toward south Arkansas, with his wife, Tinya Sterling, as a passenger in the front seat, while Sterling's daughter and Jones were passengers in the backseat. Id. at 218, 228.
When they reached south Arkansas, the route toward the rendezvous destination took them along County Road 133 in Drew County. Id. at 120, 160-61. Unbeknownst to Daniels, drug task force officers had obtained a search warrant for his vehicle, and an officer activated the blue lights behind him. Id. at 116-17, 160-61, 236. Daniels was preparing to stop, when Jones said to him, Id. at 236-37. Jones dropped the dope in between the cupholder and the seat. Id. Another police car approached from the opposite direction and stopped. Id. at 120-21, 162. Daniels attempted to flee and in that attempt struck the door of the police car that had stopped in front of him, causing that door to strike an officer named Jason Akers. Id. at 123-24, 141, 152, 239. After a short chase, Daniels stopped and was arrested. Bags containing marijuana and methamphetamine were found in or along the road. Id. at 126, 129-31, 152-53, 367. In a written statement, Daniels said that he threw the methamphetamine out of the car. Id. at 383. Jones passed it up to him because the windows adjacent to the rear seat did not function. Id. Daniels' wife testified that she threw the marijuana out of the car. Id. at 219. Daniels testified, however, that he threw the marijuana out of the car. Id. at 231-32.
On August 27, 2010, Daniels had his initial appearance in the District Court of Desha County. Document #16 at 9. He was found to be indigent and Sandra Bradshaw, a public defender, was appointed to represent him. Id. The court set Daniels' bond at $1,000,000, but he was already in custody for a parole violation.
On September 14, 2010, a Criminal Information was filed in Drew County Circuit Court charging Daniels with: (1) possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver; (2) possession ofmarijuana with intent to deliver; (3) first degree child endangerment; and (4) attempted first degree battery on Officer Akers. Document #16 at 7-8. The adult occupants of Daniels' vehicle, Jones and Sterling, were charged as co-defendants. Id. at 7. Jones was charged with possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver and possession of marijuana with intent to deliver. Id. Sterling was charged with possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver, possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and the offense of first degree child endangerment. Id. She entered a guilty plea. Id. at 220. Jones could not make his $500,000 bond, so he remained in custody as a pretrial detainee.
At trial, Daniels admitted that he possessed marijuana with intent to deliver. Id. at 230-31. He denied the remaining charges. Id. at 241. At the close of all of the evidence, the judge directed a verdict on the charge of first degree child endangerment. Document #16 at 259. The jury found Daniels not guilty on the battery charge but guilty of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. Id. at 280. In the bifurcated sentencing phase, the jury fixed Daniels' sentence to be 15 years on the possession of marijuana charge and 50 years on the methamphetamine charge, recommending that the two terms run consecutively. Id. at 312.
With this overview having been presented, the Court will review in more detail the events relevant to Daniels' claim that the circuit judge violated the sixth amendment by denying his request for a continuance.
On October 12, 2010, Daniels and his two co-defendants made their first appearances in Drew County Circuit Court. The circuit judge first took up the issue of the appropriate bond for Jones. As noted above, Jones' bond was set at $500,000. Document #16 at 57. The judgerecognized that the bond was "set way too high" and began asking questions relevant to the issue of what would be a reasonable bond for Jones. Id. at 58-59. Jones' lawyer requested a bond of $10,000. Id. at 60. The State wanted a higher bond. Id. at 62. The judge asked Jones' mother whether she had a thousand dollars in cash available,1 and she said that she did not have that much money but could try to get it. Id. In that context, the judge stated:
Id. at 62-63. Thus, immediately after setting Jones' bond at $75,000, the judge recognized that Jones probably could not make that bond, mentioned the prospect that Daniels might not be able to make bond, stated that the best thing to do was to fast-track the case, and set the case for trial during the week of December 14.
The judge then said:
After that comment, the judge turned back to Jones and questioned whether he was on parole or probation. Id. After learning that Jones was on supervised probation in a court in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, the judge noted that the court in Pine Bluff could revoke Jones' probation before December 14. Id. at 64. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial