Judge Trauger
MEMORANDUM
Gai Kuot, an inmate of the South Central Correctional Facility in Clifton, Tennessee, filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his 2012 conviction and sentence for first degree murder, felony murder, and especially aggravated robbery for which he is currently serving a sentence of life imprisonment in the Tennessee Department of Correction. (Doc. No. 1).
The respondent has filed a response to the habeas petition. (Doc. No. 11). The petition is ripe for review, and this court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Having fully considered the record, the court finds that an evidentiary hearing is not needed, and the petitioner is not entitled to relief. The petition therefore will be denied and this action will be dismissed.
I. Procedural History
On June 18, 2012, a Davidson County jury convicted the petitioner of first degree murder, felony murder, and especially aggravated robbery. (Doc. No. 8, Attach. 1 at PageID# 86-88). The court merged the murder convictions and sentenced the petitioner to life imprisonment on those two counts. (Id. at PageID# 86-87). The court also sentenced the petitioner to sixteen years' imprisonment for especially aggravated robbery, to run concurrently with his life sentence. (Id. at PageID# 88).
The petitioner appealed, and the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the judgment of the lower court on August 26, 2013. State v. Kuot, No. M2012-01884-CCA-R3-CD, 2013 WL 4539020, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 26, 2013), perm. app. denied (Dec. 11, 2013). The Tennessee Supreme Court denied the petitioner's application for discretionary review. Id.
The petitioner filed a timely petition for post-conviction relief in the Davidson County Circuit Court. (Doc. No. 8, Attach. 16 at PageID# 1261-74). The post-conviction court appointed counsel, who filed an amended petition. (Id. at PageID# 1275-76, 1281-86). Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition. (Id. at PageID# 1291-94).
The petitioner filed a timely notice of appeal, and the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief. Kuot v. State, No. M2016-00485-CCA-R3-PC, 2016 WL 7395687, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 21, 2016), perm. app. denied (Apr. 13, 2017). The Tennessee Supreme denied the petitioner's application for discretionary review. Id.
On July 3, 2017, the petitioner filed the instant pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus.1 (Doc. No. 1 at 15). By order entered on July 26, 2017, the court directed the respondent to file an answer, plead or otherwise respond to the petition in conformance with Habeas Rule 5. (Doc. No. 3). The respondent filed a response to the petition on September 22, 2017, conceding that the petition is timely and urging the court to dismiss the petition. (Doc. No. 11). The petitioner filed a reply to the respondent's response. (Doc. No. 12). The petitioner subsequently sought to amend his petition (Doc. No. 16) and, by order and memorandum opinion entered on September 7, 2018, the court denied leave to file an amended petition (Doc. Nos. 18 and 19).
In his Section 2254 petition, the petitioner asserts the following claims:
1. Claim 1: Whether the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals erroneously concluded that Sammy Sabino's testimony was admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule;
2. Claim 2: Whether the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals erroneously determined that Petitioner's right to a speedy trial was not violated;
3. Claim 3: Whether the State failed to provide Petitioner with exculpatory materials under Brady v. Maryland;
4. Claim 4: Whether the trial court erroneously permitted a witness to testify regarding cellular telephone evidence;
5. Claim 4A: Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to prevent Detective Dean Haney from testifying as an expert about the petitioner's cellular telephone records;
6. Claim 5: Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to call Teresa Bostic as a witness; and
7. Claim 6: Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to request an interpreter for the petitioner during trial. (Doc. No. 1).
III. Summary of the Evidence
The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals summarized the proof adduced at the petitioner's jury trial as follows:
On June 11, 2010, the defendant was charged with premeditated first degree murder, first degree felony murder, and especially aggravated robbery, arising out of the shooting death of the victim, Malith Wiek, in the early morning hours of April 21, 2010.
At trial, David Norton, facility manager for Montgomery Bell Academy, "MBA," testified that the victim, a "Lost Boy" refugee from Sudan, obtained employment at MBA as a custodial worker though [sic] Catholic Charities and World Relief Refugee Resettlement Programs on June 1, 2004. The victim maintained his employment until his death in April 2010. Norton was the victim's direct supervisor and noted that the victim "got along with everybody."
Norton testified that the victim's shift began at 1:00 p.m. and ended at 10:00 p.m., and he received an annual salary of $23,000. The victim also had a side business of selling long distance phone cards to other members of the refugee community in Nashville. As a result, the victim carried a large roll of cash in his pocket. Norton was never aware of an occasion when the victim was in need of financial assistance. The morning of April 21, 2010, Norton was notified by authorities that the victim was dead. He met with investigators and provided them with the victim's work schedule from the previous night.
Sergeant Mitch Kornberg with the Metro Nashville Police Department testified that he responded to an injured person call at 42nd Avenue North and Indiana Avenue on April 21, 2010. When he arrived, Sergeant Kornberg saw a black male sitting on the ground, leaning against a chain-link fence. The individual had been shot multiple times and was deceased. The body was located in the corner of an L-shaped part of the fence outside a business, and Sergeant Kornberg surmised that the victim had been trapped in this portion of the fence. The victim was wearing a maroon MBA shirt with tan pants and a name tag on a lanyard around his neck. Sergeant Kornberg noticed calling cards or credit cards on the victim's lap.
William Deng testified that he immigrated to the United States in 1995, and he was reacquainted with the victim, his cousin, when the victim moved to the United States in 2004 from Sudan. Deng knew the victim's father, as they were from the same village in Sudan. In 2009, Deng relinquished his apartment and visited Sudan for three months. When he returned to the United States, Deng moved in with the victim and the defendant in their apartment at 5800 Maudina Avenue. The victim and the defendant each occupied a bedroom, and Deng slept on the couch. Deng gained employment at Standard Candy Company about two months after moving in with the victim and the defendant. After he got a job, Deng started paying rent to live in the apartment.
Deng testified that, before his return trip to Sudan, he worked in a security job, which required that he carry a gun. He bought a PT 92 Beretta nine-millimeter at Gun City USA, and he had two magazines for it—one he kept in the weapon and one in the glovebox of his Nissan Pathfinder. Deng stored the gun between the driver's and passenger's seats, hidden from view. On April 12 or 13, 2010, Deng discovered that his gun was missing and called the police. His car was locked and showed no signs of forced entry. Whoever took Deng's gun did not take its holster or the magazine in the glovebox. The police informed Deng that he had to have the serial number in order to file a report, so he went to Gun City and paid them to retrieve his serial number. After a phone call and visit by Deng, Gun City had still not provided the serial number, although an employee informed Deng that "[t]hey ha[d] a lot of leads[.]" Deng noted that he always placed his keys on the kitchen table when he entered the apartment, as did both the victim and the defendant. He said that he and the victim got along well.
Deng testified that the victim bought calling cards in bulk and sold them to members of the Sudanese community in Nashville, often at a coffee shop on Murfreesboro Road popular amongst the Sudanese men. When the victim received cash for the cards, he either took it to the bank or put it in his pocket. Deng noted that the victim "sometimes" had cash on him. The victim carried the phone cards in a black computer bag that he kept with him or in his room.
Deng testified that, during this time period, he was studying Criminal Justice at Strayer University and attended classes on Monday and Tuesday evenings from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. On April 20, 2010, Deng got out of class early, around 9:00 or 9:20 p.m., and went home and watched a basketball game. No one else was home at the time, and Deng fell asleep on the couch and did not hear either of his roommates come home that night.
Deng testified that, the next morning, two or three detectives came to the apartment and spoke with him. The detectives knocked on the door to the defendant's bedroom and, although Deng had not heard the defendant come home, the defendant exited his room wearing street clothes. Deng thought it was unusual that the defendant was not wearing "sleeping clothes" like he normally did. After seeing that the defendant was home, Deng expected the victim to be home as well and was surprised that the victim was not in his room.
Deng testified that the officers asked them to come to the police station, and Deng drove himself and the defendant there to be interviewed. Deng recalled that the victim drove a Nissan Sentra
...
