Daniels v. Lewis
| Decision Date | 15 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | 1:18 CV 267 MTS |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
| Parties | JERYL DANIELS, Petitioner, v. JASON LEWIS, Respondent. |
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Jeryl Daniels's Petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for writ of habeas corpus, Doc. [1]. For the following reasons, Petitioner's § 2254 petition is denied.
Petitioner is currently incarcerated at the Jefferson City Correctional Center in Jefferson City, Missouri. On September 25, 2013 Petitioner was charged in the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri with murder in the first degree, two counts of assault in the first degree, and three counts of armed criminal action. Doc. [8-4] at 7-8. After a jury found him guilty of all counts, he was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for the murder, and five concurrent terms of fifteen-years imprisonment for the assault in the first degree counts and the armed criminal action counts. See Docs. [8-2] at 553-557, and [8-4] at 78-81. On June 14, 2016, Petitioner's convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal in State of Missouri v. Daniels, ED 102826, 491 S.W.3d 680 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016). Doc. [8-8].
Petitioner filed a timely pro se Missouri Supreme Court Rule 29.15 motion, and an amended motion was filed by post-conviction counsel on October 5, 2016. Doc. [8-11] at 21. After an evidentiary hearing was held on December 1, 2016, the motion court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Petitioner's amended motion for post-conviction relief. Petitioner appealed the motion court's findings, and on July 24, 2018, the court of appeals affirmed the motion court's decision. Daniels v. State of Missouri, ED 105432, 551 S.W.3d 110 (Mo.Ct.App. E.D. July 24, 2018). Doc. [8-15]. On November 1, 2018, Petitioner filed a writ of habeas corpus in this Court, pursuant to § 2254. Doc. [1].
On June 1, 2013, Michael Curtis (“Curtis”), Ryan Thurman (“Thurman”), and Marrion Dotson (“Dotson”) went to visit their friend Shay. Curtis, Thurman, and Dotson decided to rob Petitioner. Curtis and Thurman called Petitioner, asked to purchase marijuana from him, and arranged to meet with him. Around 12:30 p.m., Curtis and Thurman left Shay's house and walked across the street to Petitioner's apartment. Dotson stayed behind. Curtis was carrying a handgun in the pocket of his jacket. Curtis and Thurman met Petitioner on the ground floor of his apartment building. Soon thereafter, Curtis pulled out the gun, while Thurman searched Petitioner's pockets and took marijuana, money, and Petitioner's driver's license. Thurman and Curtis brought the items back to Shay's house. Curtis and Thurman split up the money and marijuana, while Dotson took Petitioner's driver's license and put it in his pants pocket. Approximately a half an hour later, Curtis, Thurman, and Dotson walked to Curtis's home and shot dice for about an hour. They then left Curtis's home around 2:00 p.m. and began walking back to Shay's house. While walking, Curtis saw a blue Chevrolet Impala pause for approximately thirty seconds at a nearby stop sign. Soon after, Petitioner leaned out of the passenger side window of the Impala and shot at them with a rifle. As Curtis, Thurman, and Dotson ran away, the car moved toward them. Petitioner shot a total of twenty-one rounds at them from the Impala. Thurman died at the scene. Curtis and Dotson were injured. Thurman was shot once in the leg and once in the back of the neck through his spinal cord. Curtis was shot in the buttocks, and Dotson was shot in the arm. Curtis and Dotson were hospitalized for their injuries.
Two men who lived on the same street where the shooting occurred, Stephen Azar (“Azar”) and Phillip Greenlee (“Greenlee”), heard and witnessed portions of the shooting. Azar was on his porch when he heard shots being fired outside of his house. He saw an individual hanging out of the passenger window of a blue Chevrolet Impala holding a gun and shooting at three young men, killing one of them. Azar called 911 while the vehicle was fleeing the scene. Greenlee also heard shots being fired and then saw a blue Chevrolet Impala driving slowly in front of his house. At the scene, police recovered twenty-one shell casings fired from a .223 rifle. Police also recovered Petitioner's driver's license from Dotson's pants at the hospital. After Curtis was treated for his injuries, he identified Petitioner from a photo lineup as the person who shot at them.[1] Police subsequently arrested Petitioner and searched his cell phone. Officers discovered Petitioner and his girlfriend Daisha Ketchum (“Girlfriend”) made several calls to one another on the day of the shooting; after the time Petitioner was robbed at approximately 12:30 p.m. and shortly before and after the time the shootings occurred at approximately 2:00 p.m. During the investigation, police also discovered Girlfriend owned a 2001 blue Chevrolet Impala. Girlfriend told the police that she had loaned her car to Petitioner on the day of the shooting. The police subsequently showed pictures of the car to Curtis and Azar, and they both identified it as the car involved in the shooting.
Petitioner presented an alibi defense at trial based on the testimony of one witness, Jamar Henderson (“Henderson”). Henderson, who had been friends with Petitioner for over 15 years, testified that Petitioner called him about 1:00 p.m. on the day of the robbery, and that Petitioner came to his house around 1:20 p.m. After spending time with Henderson's nephews, Petitioner and Henderson left Henderson's house around 2:00 p.m. Henderson testified that they then drove to Spanish Lake in Petitioner's white Maxima to pick up some money they had loaned to a friend. They also went to a couple of stores before returning to Henderson's place between 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Henderson testified they were never in a blue Impala or near the scene of the shooting that day.
Although Henderson visited Petitioner 62 times while Defendant was in jail pending trial, Henderson testified he never spoke to police about their whereabouts on the day of the shooting because the police never called him, despite phone records to the contrary. Doc. [8-2] at 462. During cross-examination, Henderson was questioned about his failure to come forward with the alibi sooner. Henderson admitted he first spoke to Petitioner's attorney about Petitioner's alibi in September 2014, over a year after Petitioner's arrest. Henderson admitted that even though he was aware that Petitioner had been arrested for Thurman's death as soon as it happened, he did not provide an alibi for Petitioner until much later because “it never came up.” Doc. [8-8] at 4-5. Henderson also testified that he did not think the alibi was enough and that he thought it was enough to tell Petitioner's attorney. Doc. [8-2] at 474-475. During closing argument, the State referred to Henderson as an admitted liar who had admitted to providing false information, Id. at 525, and that Henderson was not credible because he never told his probation officer or police that Petitioner, his best friend, was with him during the time the crimes were being committed.
After considering all the evidence, the jury found Petitioner guilty of one count of murder in the first-degree, two counts of assault in the first-degree, and three counts of armed criminal action. The trial court sentenced Petitioner, as a prior offender, to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for the murder count, and to fifteen years of imprisonment for each of the remaining counts, with the sentences to run concurrently. Petitioner subsequently filed a direct appeal. His convictions and sentences were affirmed. State of Missouri v. Daniels, 491 S.W.3d 680 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016). While his direct appeal was still pending, Petitioner prematurely filed a pro se Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief. The motion court issued an order appointing post-conviction counsel for Petitioner on September 24, 2015. The motion court then granted counsel's motion to hold Petitioner's post-conviction relief file open pending the conclusion of his direct appeal. After the mandate was issued in Petitioner's direct appeal, postconviction counsel filed an amended motion for post-conviction relief, alleging several ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Subsequently, the motion court held an evidentiary hearing on Petitioner's amended motion. Following the hearing, the motion court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Petitioner's Rule 29.15 motion. Petitioner appealed, and the motion court's decision was affirmed in Daniels v. State of Missouri, ED 105432, 551 S.W.3d 110 (Mo. App. E.D. 2018).
When a claim has been adjudicated on the merits in state court proceedings, habeas relief is permissible under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), though such relief is “limited and deferential.” Lomholt v. Iowa, 327 F.3d 748, 751 (8th Cir. 2003). Under AEDPA, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), habeas relief is only permissible if the state court's determination:
A state court's decision is “contrary to” clearly established Federal law if “it applies a rule that contradicts the governing law set...
To continue reading
Request your trial