Freeland v. Glunt

Decision Date30 May 2018
Docket NumberCivil No. 3:15-cv-965
PartiesKEYON FREELAND, Petitioner v. STEVEN GLUNT, et al., Respondents
CourtU.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania

(Judge Mariani)

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Keyon Freeland ("Freeland"), an inmate currently confined at the Rockview State Correctional Institution in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, filed the instant pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 1). The matter is proceeding via an amended petition. (Doc. 8). Freeland challenges his conviction and sentence from the York County Court of Common Pleas. (Id.). For the reasons discussed below, the Court will deny the amended habeas petition.

I. Factual Background

The factual background of this case has been aptly summarized by the Pennsylvania Superior Court as follows:

On January 8, 2011, Kyree Maxfield and Ja'Quinn Barnes were walking around the City of York after leaving a party. They went to a friend's house on Smyser Street, but left to go home after a fight broke out in front of the Smyser Street residence. As Maxfield and Barnes left the house, a car pulled alongside them, and a man, later identified as Freeland, got out of the vehicle. Freeland told them to give him everything they had. He pulled out two guns, then ordered Maxfield and Barnes to undress and dress again. He then shot at the pair, missing Barnes, but inflicting two gunshot wounds to Maxfield's left leg and one to his hand. At the time of the shooting, Maxfield and Barnes were about eight feet away from Freeland. The area was dimly lit and the shooter was not wearing a mask.
By the time police arrived minutes after the shooting, Freeland had left the area. Maxfield was then transported to the York Hospital. Dr. Keith Clancy treated Maxfield for the severe injury to his femoral artery, which caused him to lose his pulse in his leg and fifteen units of blood. Dr. Clancy testified that were it not for emergency surgery, Maxfield would have died.
On January 12, 2011 at around 3:45 p.m., Officer Ryan Anderson attempted to pull-over a gray sedan on Philadelphia Avenue by activating his lights and sirens. The vehicle pulled away and Officer Anderson pursued it. The chase continued until the sedan collided with a telephone pole, and the passenger and driver fled on foot in opposite directions. Officer Anderson chased the driver on foot, during which time the driver threw two objects from his person. These objects, retrieved after the driver and passenger were in custody, were guns, Officer Anderson identified the driver as Freeland, and one of the guns that Freeland threw during the chase was later determined to be one of the guns that shot Maxfield.

(Doc. 16-1, pp. 315-317, Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. 553 MDA 2012, unpublished memorandum (Pa. Super. filed August 23, 2012) (footnotes omitted)).

II. State Court Proceedings

On January 19, 2011, Freeland was charged with two counts of criminal attempt homicide, two counts of aggravated assault, and one count of persons not to possess a firearm. See electronic docket sheet for Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. CP-67-CR-0001946-2011 (York Cnty. Ct. Com. Pl.), found at https://ujsportal.pacourts.us. Although represented by counsel, Freeland filed his own omnibus pre-trial motions,including a motion for substitution of counsel. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 7-10, Motion for Substitution of Counsel). On September 26, 2011, Judge Richard K. Renn of the York County Court of Common Pleas scheduled a hearing on Freeland's motion for substitution of counsel for immediately prior to the commencement of trial. (Doc. 16-1, p. 11, Order Scheduling Hearing). Although scheduled, the hearing on Freeland's motion did not occur.

A jury trial was held from December 6, 2011 through December 8, 2011, in the Court of Common Pleas of York County. (See Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. CP-67-CR-0001946-2011; see also Doc. 16-1, pp. 12-292, N.T. Jury Trial, 12/6/11 - 12/8/11). On December 8, 2011, the jury convicted Freeland of attempted homicide of Maxfield, aggravated assault (causing serious bodily injury) of Maxfield, and illegal possession of a firearm. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 315-24, Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. 553 MDA 2012). The jury acquitted Freeland of the attempted homicide of Barnes, and aggravated assault (serious bodily injury) of Barnes. (See id.). On February 17, 2012, the court sentenced Freeland to an aggregate term of fourteen to twenty-eight years' incarceration in a state correctional institution. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 285-90, N.T. Sentencing, 2/17/12). Freeland filed a post-sentence motion, which the trial court denied. (See Doc. 16-1, p. 317, Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. 553 MDA 2012).

Freeland pursued direct appeal proceedings challenging the sufficiency of the evidence for attempted homicide, the publication to the jury of the red-tinged color photofrom the photo array lineup that he claimed depicted injuries to his face, and the trial court's admission of the police video of the car chase and flight on foot. See Commonwealth v. Freeland, 106 A.3d 768, 773 (Pa. Super. 2014). On August 23, 2012, the Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence, rejecting all three claims. (See Doc. 16-1, pp. 315-24, Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. 553 MDA 2012). Freeland did not file a petition for allowance of appeal with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. (See Doc. 8, p. 2).

On March 4, 2013, Freeland filed a pro se petition for post-conviction collateral relief pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act ("PCRA"), 42 PA. CONS. STAT. §§ 9541-46. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 325-332, PCRA Petition). The PCRA court appointed counsel, who filed an amended petition on April 24, 2013. See Commonwealth v. Freeland, 106 A.3d at 773. That counsel, and other counsel, were subsequently permitted to withdraw. See id. The PCRA eventually appointed Attorney Scott A. McCabe, who filed an amended petition on August 16, 2013. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 344-47, Amended PCRA Petition). On September 25, 2013, a hearing was held and the PCRA court denied relief from the bench. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 349-446, N.T. PCRA Hearing, 9/25/13). The PCRA court subsequently issued a written order denying relief, which also explained the reasons for its denial. See Commonwealth v. Freeland, 106 A.3d at 773.

On October 3, 2013, counsel filed a timely notice of appeal. (Doc. 16-1, p. 448, Notice of Appeal). On March 13, 2014, the Superior Court remanded the appeal back to thePCRA court for a determination of whether counsel had abandoned Freeland by failing to file a brief. (Doc. 16-1, p. 477, Order, per curiam, 3/13/14). On remand, the PCRA court held a hearing and found that counsel had drafted a Turner/Finley1 letter, but inadvertently failed to file and serve it in a timely fashion. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 479-85, N.T. Hearing, 3/27/14; see also pp. 482-84, Order, 3/27/14). The PCRA court concluded that counsel had not abandoned Freeland. (See id.). The PCRA court issued an order directing counsel to file and serve his Turner/Finley letter and application to withdraw with the Superior Court. (See id.). The PCRA court also recommended that the Superior Court permit counsel to file his Turner/Finley letter. (See id.).

On April 4, 2014, Attorney McCabe filed a petition to withdraw with the Superior Court, attaching his Turner/Finley "no merit" letter, with notice to Freeland that he had the right to proceed pro se or retain private counsel. See Commonwealth v. Freeland, 106 A.3d at 774. On April 29, 2014, Freeland filed an application for relief. See id. On May 2, 2014, he filed a pro se response to the Turner/Finley letter. See id. Freeland also requested an extension to file a "cross-appeal" in support of his opposition to counsel's petition to withdraw. See id. After being granted two extensions of time, Freeland filed a pro se brief in response to counsel's petition to withdraw. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 486-559, Pro Se Brief). OnDecember 11, 2014, the Superior Court affirmed the decision of the PCRA court. (Doc. 16-1, pp. 596-624, Commonwealth v. Freeland, No. 1790 MDA 2013 (Pa. Super. filed December 11, 2014)). Specifically, the Superior Court granted counsel's petition to withdraw, finding that PCRA counsel fulfilled the mandates of Turner/Finley, the issues in the PCRA petition had no merit, and that Freeland's pro se response to counsel's Turner/Finley letter did not entitle him to relief. See id.

III. Standards of Review

The statutory authority of federal courts to issue habeas corpus relief for persons in state custody is provided by 28 U.S.C. § 2254, as amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"). A habeas corpus petition pursuant to § 2254 is the proper mechanism for a prisoner to challenge the "fact or duration" of his confinement. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 498-99, 93 S.Ct. 1827, 36 L.Ed.2d 439 (1973). "[I]t is not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state-court determinations on state-law questions." Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68, 112 S.Ct. 475, 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991). Rather, federal habeas review is restricted to claims based "on the ground that [petitioner] is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a); Estelle, 502 U.S. at 68.

A. Exhaustion

Habeas corpus relief cannot be granted unless all available state remedies havebeen exhausted, or there is an absence of available state corrective process, or circumstances exist that render such process ineffective to protect the rights of the applicant. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). The exhaustion requirement is grounded on principles of comity in order to ensure that state courts have the initial opportunity to review federal constitutional challenges to state convictions. See Werts v. Vaughn, 228 F.3d 178, 192 (3d Cir. 2000).

A state prisoner exhausts state remedies by giving the "state courts one full opportunity to resolve any constitutional issues by invoking one complete round of the State's...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT