Jackson v. Kirkpatrick
| Decision Date | 04 January 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. 16-CV-3973 (JFB),16-CV-3973 (JFB) |
| Parties | ANTHONY JACKSON, Petitioner, v. KIRKPATRICK, SUPERINTENDENT, CLINTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Anthony Jackson ("Jackson" or "petitioner"), proceeding pro se, petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his conviction in New York State court. (See Pet., ECF No. 1; Pet. Aff., ECF No. 1-2)1 On September 22, 2011, a jury found petitioner guilty of three counts of murder in the second degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 125.25(3); three counts of robbery in the first degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 160.15(1), (2), and (4); three counts of burglary in the first degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 140.30(1), (2), and (4); one count of robbery in the second degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 160.10(1); one count of burglary in the second degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 140.25(2); one count of kidnapping in the first degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 135.25(3); one count of kidnapping in the second degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 135.20; and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, in violation of N.Y. Penal Law § 265.03(1)(b) and (3). On November 9, 2011, petitioner was sentenced to multiple concurrent terms of imprisonment, the longest of which was twenty years to life.
In the instant habeas action, petitioner challenges his conviction, arguing that: (1) hereceived ineffective assistance of counsel on multiple grounds; (2) that his rights under the Fourth Amendment were violated; and (3) his rights under the Confrontation Clause were violated. For the reasons discussed below, petitioner's request for a writ of habeas corpus is denied on the merits.
The following facts are adduced from the underlying record and the instant petition.
On June 15, 2010, at approximately 1:45 a.m., Tristan Theodore ("Theodore") and his friend Brandon James ("James") arrived at 980 South End, Woodmere, New York. (Tr. Testimony of Brandon James ("James T."), ECF No. 7-5, at 515-16.) This location was Theodore's family residence; James was living with Theodore's family at the time. (James T. at 512-13.) Upon arriving home, Theodore and James exited their vehicle and were ambushed by two men armed with handguns. (James T. at 516, 519.) Neither man had their face covered and James was able to view their faces. (James T. at 522.) The two men forced Theodore and James into the house at gunpoint, ordering them to get on the floor removing their personal belongings from their pockets, including their cell phones and sums of currency. (James T. at 516-20.) The assailants then ordered Theodore and James to go to the basement, where one of the assailants struck Theodore in the head with his handgun and the other struck James with his handgun. (James T. at 517-21, 581-84.) In addition, the assailants proceeded to cover Theodore's and James' mouths with duct tape, though the duct tape from James' mouth was removed. (James T. at 517, 520, 523, 535, 583-87, 614-16.) The assailants threatened to kill Theodore's parents if Theodore and James failed to comply with their demands. (Hr. Testimony of Detective James Cereghino ("Cereghino H."), ECF No. 7-1, at 18.) Then, the assailants led Theodore and James out of the basement, took a PlayStation game system from the home, and took Theodore's car keys. (James T. at 517-18.)
The assailants then left the location with Theodore and James, forced them to get into Theodore's car, and one of the assailants began driving the car away from the home. (Cereghino H. at 19, James T. at 524-25, 537, 585, 589-93.) As the car began to move, James decided to attempt escape, jumped out of the car, and ran back to Theodore's home. (James T. at 525.) As he fled from the car, James heard the sound of a gunshot. (James T. at 525.) When James reached Theodore's home, he woke up Theodore's parents and they called 911 for assistance. (James T. at 525-56; Tr. Testimony of Elizabeth Theodore ( ), ECF No. 7-4, at 371.)2 Upon later investigation, it was determined that Theodore also tried to escape the car, but was shot as he fled. (Cereghino H. at 19-20.) Theodore was found in the yard of a nearby location by Police Officer Jonathan Cutrone of the Nassau County Police Department. (Tr. Testimony of Police Officer Jonathan Cutrone ("Cutrone T."), ECF No. 7-4, at 410-11.) Upon approach, Officer Cutrone saw that Theodore was bleeding; Theodore told him that he had been shot by an unknown person. (Cutrone T. at 410.) Officer Cutrone called for an ambulance to respond and Theodore was taken to South Nassau County Hospital. (Cutrone T. at 411.) Theodore waspronounced dead at the hospital, the cause of death determined to be the gunshot wound. (Tr. Testimony of Dr. Tamara Bloom ("Bloom T."), ECF No. 7-4, at 397-98.)
Detective Cereghino was assigned to the investigation and arrived at the scene at approximately 7:00 a.m. on June 15, 2010. (Tr. Testimony of Detective James Cereghino ("Cereghino T."), ECF No. 7-8, at 942.) Detective Cereghino canvassed the surrounding area, locating evidence, including duct tape. (Cereghino T. at 943.) Specifically, duct tape was recovered from inside Theodore's basement and in the vicinity of the location where Theodore was found. (Tr. Testimony of Detective Daniel Miller ("Miller T."), ECF No. 7-4, 7-5, at 420.) These items were packaged according to police protocol and sent for latent fingerprint and DNA testing. (Miller T. at 482.) In addition, a PlayStation game system and two bullet casings were recovered from inside Theodore's vehicle and officers observed a bullet exit hole in the rear driver's side door. (Miller T. at 420, 430-32.)
In addition, Detective Cereghino interviewed James, obtaining descriptions of the assailants, and obtained Theodore's stolen cell phone information to begin tracking the phone in hopes of locating the assailants. (Cereghino T. at 944.) Further canvasing was completed in search of video surveillance. (Cereghino T. at 945.) Officers collected surveillance footage from a nearby home video surveillance system, red light cameras, and a patrol unit's automatic license plate reader to help locate the relevant vehicles. (Cereghino T. at 947-52.) The video surveillance, coupled with eyewitness observations, led officers to identify Edward Williams as one of the two assailants. (Cereghino T. at 945-51.)
Ultimately, Theodore's cell phone was tracked to an apartment building in Brooklyn, New York; officers took photographs of individuals in the vicinity of this building to use in photographic arrays to assist in identifying the assailants. (Cereghino H. at 33.) One of the individuals photographed was petitioner. (Cereghino H. at 34.) Petitioner's photograph was incorporated into a photographic array; James identified petitioner in the photographic array as one of the two assailants. (Cereghino H. at 34-36.)
A trap-and-trace order was issued for petitioner's telephone number to assist in locating him. (Tr. Testimony of Detective Sergeant Devon Ross ("Ross T."), ECF No. 7-7, at 860.) Upon effectuating this trap-and-trace order, police were able to determine the current location of petitioner's phone based upon signals communicated from the phone to the nearby cell-phone towers and petitioner was apprehended on August 12, 2010. (Ross T. at 859-62.)3
On October 21, 2010, a lineup was administered to be viewed by James; James identified petitioner in this lineup. (Cereghino T. at 958-59; James T. at 543-44.) After petitioner's arrest, Detective Cereghino requested petitioner's fingerprints be compared to the evidence obtained related to the crime. (Cereghino T. at 959-60.) Following testing and comparison, it was determined that petitioner left a print from his right ring finger on the duct tape recovered from inside Theodore's basement and a print from his left middle finger on the duct tape recovered from the area where Theodore wasfound. (Tr. Testimony of Detective John Laura ("Laura T."), ECF No. 7-6, at 684-700; Tr. Testimony of Detective Steven Koehler ("Koehler T."), ECF No. 7-7, at 915-21.)
From February 8 through February 16, 2011, a suppression hearing was held in Nassau County Supreme Court, during which members of the Nassau County Police Department testified regarding the identifications and arrest of petitioner. (H. at 15-164.) Following testimony and arguments from counsel, the hearing court found that there was probable cause to arrest petitioner and that the identification procedures shown to James were not unduly suggestive. (H. at 181-84.)
Petitioner was tried in Nassau County Supreme Court starting on September 6, 2011. (T. at 344.) At trial, the prosecution presented the testimony of twenty three witnesses, including the surviving victim, civilian witnesses, members of the police department, and expert witnesses involved in the investigation of the crime. (T. at 369-1025.) Following the presentation of the prosecution's evidence, defense counsel moved for a trial order of dismissal. (T. at 1027-29.) The trial court denied the motion and defense counsel did not call any additional witnesses. (T. at 1045.) Following summations from both defense counsel and the prosecution, the jury began deliberations. (T. at 1046-1126.)
On September 22, 2011, the jury finished deliberating and petitioner was convicted of three counts of murder in the second degree, three counts of robbery in the first degree, three counts of burglary in the first degree, one count of robbery in the second degree, one count of burglary in the second degree, one count of kidnapping in the first degree, one count of kidnapping in the second degree, and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. (T. at 1204-07.) Petitioner was acquitted of two counts of robbery in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial