Holt v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
| Decision Date | 16 February 2023 |
| Docket Number | 8:19-cv-2730-SDM-TGW |
| Parties | STOBERT HOLT, Applicant, v. SECRETARY, Department of Corrections, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
Holt applies under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of habeas corpus (Docs. 1 and 2) and challenges his convictions for manslaughter and extortion, for which Holt is imprisoned for thirty years. Numerous exhibits support the response. (Doc 10) The respondent admits the application's timeliness (Doc. 10 at 25-26) but argues that some grounds are unexhausted and procedurally barred. (Doc. 10 at 26-27)
Robert Wiles, who was twenty-six, worked at his father's airplane maintenance company for two years. Wiles worked at a facility in Lakeland, Florida, and his father worked at the company's headquarters in Toledo, Ohio.
On the morning of April 3, 2008, Wiles's father called Wiles on the telephone, but Wiles did not answer. Wiles's father left his mobile telephone in his car while he attended a meeting until 7:00 P.M. Wiles's father returned to his car and saw on his telephone that Wiles had called him three times. Wiles's father called Wiles someone answered, but no one spoke. Wiles's father read a text message sent earlier from Wiles:
Wiles's father knew that Wiles planned to attend a trade show in Dallas, Texas. Wiles's father did not immediately become concerned because he thought that Wiles may have sent the text message as a joke for April Fools' Day. Wiles's father met Wiles's supervisor at the company's headquarters in Toledo, accessed his work e-mail account, and saw the following message from Wiles's e-mail account:
Wiles's father contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigations and arranged for Holt, the manager at the Lakeland facility, to provide law enforcement access to the facility.
Wiles and Holt frequently clashed with each other at work. Wiles blamed Holt for the Lakeland facility's underperformance and poor customer service. Holt blamed Wiles, who was young and lacked experience, for underestimating both the cost of work and the time needed to complete work. Holt and other employees at the Lakeland facility alienated Wiles, even though Wiles, the son of the owner of the company, would likely become an owner of the company in the future. The company's chief operating officer encouraged Wiles and Holt to work together and moved Wiles's office next to Holt's office. Wiles's unrealistic promises to clients affected both the overall output at the facility and Holt's quarterly bonus. Holt asked the chief operating officer to transfer Wiles to another facility. One week before Wiles disappeared, an employee told Wiles that Holt and two other employees did not like Wiles. Wiles responded that he was not concerned because the company might soon terminate Holt.
On April 1, 2008, Holt called a technician and asked if he planned to return to the facility that evening. The technician confirmed that he did. Holt normally left work at 4:30 P.M. but greeted the technician at 5:30 P.M. The technician felt that Holt wanted him to leave because Holt followed him around the facility. The technician's timecard showed that he left the facility at 6:10 P.M. Phone records showed that Holt called a Home Depot in Lakeland near the Imperial Swan Hotel on the evening of April 1, 2008. Thirteen minutes later, two rolls of duct tape and a plastic tarp were purchased from that Home Depot. Video surveillance at the Imperial Swan Hotel showed that Holt entered the hotel around 9:00 P.M. and exited the hotel about ten minutes later. Holt returned to the hotel just before midnight.
The company's records showed that someone used Wiles's code to disarm the alarm system at 7:15 P.M. and re-arm the alarm system at 7:18 P.M. During this time, cell site data showed Holt's mobile telephone near the Lakeland facility.
Wiles's father received on April 3, 2008 the text message from Wiles's telephone suggesting that he read his work e-mail. Cell site data showed that Wiles's mobile telephone traveled east from Lakeland to Orlando the evening of April 3, 2008. Photographs from cameras installed at toll booths, records from the toll booth operator, bank records, and cell site data confirmed that Holt, his car, and his mobile telephone traveled east along the same route about the same time.
FBI agents interviewed Holt. Holt admitted to the agents that he lied to his wife about traveling to Dallas to attend the conference. Holt instead stayed in Lakeland at the Imperial Swan Hotel to meet a female friend, Beverly Vowels. Vowels could not meet Holt, and Holt remained in Lakeland. Holt claimed that he last saw Wiles on April 1, 2008 at 6:30 P.M. Holt claimed that he went to Hooters at 6:45 P.M. to drink beer. Surveillance video from Hooters showed that Holt never entered or exited the restaurant that night. Holt claimed that he went to the Outback at 9:00 P.M. and paid his bill with a credit card. Records from the Outback restaurant showed that Holt never paid a bill with a credit card on that day.
Holt admitted to the agents that he drove to Orlando on April 3, 2008 to visit another female friend named Bridgett Beard. Holt could not explain why cell site data showed that his mobile telephone and Wiles's mobile telephone traveled together to Orlando that evening.
Holt denied keeping a firearm in his car and consented to a search of his car. Agents found a forty-caliber Sig Sauer handgun in a gun case wrapped in a plastic bag underneath the hood of Holt's car. Holt could not explain the presence of the gun, and agents did not seize the gun. Five days after the agents' discovery of the handgun, Holt told the agents that he had placed the handgun in his car for protection in January 2008 and used the handgun for target shooting. Holt claimed that he had kept the handgun in the trunk but moved the handgun underneath the hood in April 2008. Holt said he did not disclose this explanation about the handgun to the agents earlier because Holt feared how the agents would respond.
On April 21, 2008, Holt paid a deposit to a gun shop for a new forty-caliber barrel for the forty-caliber handgun that the agents discovered underneath the hood of his car. The gun shop owner testified that a gun owner typically will not purchase a replacement barrel of the same caliber because a barrel will not wear out from normal use during the lifetime of the gun owner. A firearms expert testified that a barrel leaves unique marks on a bullet discharged through the barrel. A tool-mark examiner can match the unique marks left on the bullet with the barrel through which the bullet traveled. The examiner testified that changing the barrel will change the unique markings left on a bullet.
The defense presented testimony by Carrie Lindsey, whose husband, Steven Lindsey, worked for the airplane maintenance company. In 2002, Wiles's father fired Steven Lindsey after Lindsey injured a client while driving under the influence of alcohol. Steven Lindsey continued to work at other companies until his death from cancer in 2009. On April 1, 2008, when Wiles disappeared, Lindsey traveled for a week on a business trip. During the trip, Carrie Lindsey received telephone calls from people who were trying to locate Steven Lindsey. After his return from the trip, Steven Lindsey appeared sick and tired as if he had abused drugs.
James Blake testified that, on April 12, 2008, police stopped him while he was driving a gold-colored Ford pickup truck, which he borrowed from a friend named Armstrong, who identified Steven Lindsey as the owner of the truck. Two women with Lindsey offered to let Armstrong use the truck for a few hours in exchange for crack cocaine. Armstrong instead gave one of the women thirty dollars, and Lindsey gave him the keys. Afterwards, Armstrong picked up Blake and let Blake use the truck.
Wiles's father testified that Steve Lindsey worked for his company as a mechanic. After Wiles's father fired Lindsey, Wiles's father continued to purchase and sell airplane parts with Lindsey. Wiles's father agreed to give Lindsey an expensive airplane part that Lindsey needed to complete a repair if Lindsey agreed to pay Wiles's father after receiving payment for the repair. Lindsey never paid Wiles's father for the part. Lindsey wanted to return to work for Wiles's father. Wiles's father told Lindsey that he needed to pay for the part before Wiles's father would hire him again. Other employees who worked at the company, including Wiles, encouraged Wiles's father to hire Lindsey. Lindsey became angry when Wiles's father refused to answer his telephone calls.
An FBI agent testified that he interviewed Lindsey about Wiles's disappearance on ...
To continue reading
Request your trial