Long v. Hooks

• Decision Date: 08 January 2020
• Docket Number: No. 18-6980,18-6980
• Citation: 947 F.3d 159
• Parties: Ronnie Wallace LONG, Petitioner – Appellant, v. Erik A. HOOKS, Secretary, NC Dep’t of Public Safety, Respondent – Appellee. Thomas Albright, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Valena Elizabeth Beety, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Barbara E. Bierer, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; C. Michael Bowers, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Arturo Casadevall, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Jessica Gabel Cino, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Simon A. Cole, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; M. Bonner Denton, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Shari Seidman Diamond, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Rachel Dioso-Villa, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Jules Epstein, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; David L. Faigman, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory, Amici Supporting Appellant.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

947 F.3d 159

Ronnie Wallace LONG, Petitioner – Appellant,

v. Erik A. HOOKS, Secretary, NC Dep’t of Public Safety, Respondent – Appellee.Thomas Albright, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Valena Elizabeth Beety, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Barbara E. Bierer, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; C. Michael Bowers, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Arturo Casadevall, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Jessica Gabel Cino, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Simon A. Cole, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; M. Bonner Denton, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Shari Seidman Diamond, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Rachel Dioso-Villa, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; Jules Epstein, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory Conrad T. Prebys Chair in Vision Research Salk Institute for Biological Studies; David L. Faigman, Professor and Director Vision Center Laboratory, Amici Supporting Appellant.

No. 18-6980

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued: March 20, 2019

Decided: January 8, 2020

RICHARDSON, Circuit Judge:

Ronnie Wallace Long is serving two life sentences after a North Carolina jury convicted him of rape and burglary in 1976. Long has filed a second application for a federal writ of habeas corpus. In it, he claims that a state post-conviction court unreasonably applied Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), when evaluating evidence disclosed to him for the first time thirty years after his trial. The district court disagreed and granted the state's motion for summary judgment.¹

We affirm. Although Long shows the state court's summary conclusion misstated the burden of proof for Brady claims, that error does not entitle Long to habeas relief. To overcome the required deference to state courts, Long must show that each reason supporting the state court's decision is objectively wrong beyond any possibility for fairminded disagreement. Wetzel v. Lambert, 565 U.S. 520, 525, 132 S.Ct. 1195, 182 L.Ed.2d 35 (2012); Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 102, 131 S.Ct. 770, 178 L.Ed.2d 624 (2011). Here, the state court found "the cumulative [e]ffect of any [new evidence] with any value is so minimal that it would have had no impact on the outcome of the trial." J.A. 1359 (emphasis added). This reasonable finding adequately supports the state court's decision that any newly disclosed evidence falls short of the kind of materiality that Brady requires.

I. Background

A. The 1976 burglary, rape, and investigation

On April 25, 1976, at around 9:30 p.m., a man entered the home of 54-year-old (now deceased) widow Sarah Bost in Concord, North Carolina. He put a knife to her throat and demanded money. When Mrs. Bost could not find money in her purse, the man became angry, cursed her, threw her to the ground, ripped her clothes off, beat her, and raped her. The man repeatedly ordered Mrs. Bost not to look at his face, but she defied him in hope that she could identify her attacker if she survived.

During the assault, the phone rang and startled the man. He pulled up his pants and went out the front door. Mrs. Bost ran unclothed out the back door to her neighbor's house. Once there, she told her neighbor that an African-American man had just raped her. The neighbor brought Mrs. Bost inside and called the police.

Concord Police Department officers investigated the attack. They gathered evidence from the scene and interviewed Mrs. Bost, who told them that she was "attacked and raped by a black male wearing a leather coat, toboggan, and [ ] gloves." J.A. 1429. She described her attacker as around five foot five inches to five foot nine inches tall, with a "slender build and slim hips" and a thin mustache. J.A. 1428; see also J.A. 200-1, 305. She also said that he wore blue jeans and used "correct [E]nglish and at times spoke very softly" with no noticeable accent. J.A. 1428. An ambulance then took Mrs. Bost to a local hospital.

At the hospital, Mrs. Bost was examined by Dr. Monroe, a physician specializing in gynecology. Dr. Monroe observed extensive scratches, bruising, and lacerations from Mrs. Bost's face to her legs. He also noted her "fingernails looked like they had been traumatized, or nearly bent backwards." J.A. 295. As part of a pelvic exam, Dr. Monroe assembled a microscope slide of vaginal fluid that revealed an "extremely high count of live, very active, human spermatozoa[ ]." J.A. 296. Mrs. Bost remained at the hospital for five days for observation and treatment.²

The day after the rape, officers showed Mrs. Bost a photographic lineup of thirteen male suspects, hoping she might identify her attacker. She did not identify a suspect from these photographs, which did not include a picture of Long.

Less than two weeks later, officers asked Mrs. Bost to go to the local courthouse to observe the proceedings. The Concord Police had learned about a similar burglary and rape in Washington, D.C. In that case, the victim found Long's Social Security card in her apartment after the attack. Based on the card left behind, the Washington Metropolitan Police sought Long, a Concord resident, for questioning.

Having asked Mrs. Bost to come to Court, officers informed Mrs. Bost that the man who raped her may, or may not, be present in court and that she should discretely notify them if she identified him. The officers also told her that she may have to come to court on two or more occasions. She was also asked to bring a neighbor or friend and to wear a disguise. At first reluctant, Mrs. Bost agreed.

Mrs. Bost arrived at the courthouse on the morning of May 10, 1976, wearing a red wig and glasses. Accompanied by her neighbor, she sat in the second row, while two officers sat away from them. According to the officers, there were "approximately 60 to 65 persons in the court room either in the audience or persons on trial," with "12 adult black males in the general age group" of the description given by Mrs. Bost. J.A. 1433. As Mrs. Bost observed the proceedings, several cases were called involving African-American men as defendants.

After about a half hour, Ronnie W. Long's case was called. Long, "wearing a medium brown leather coat, a l[ei]sure shirt flowered, no hat, [and] dress pants," exited the row of seats to the left side of the gallery and "walked around to the defense table where he was readily visible by Mrs. Bost." J.A. 1433. Mrs. Bost notified the officers that she had identified her attacker, telling them that "there was no doubt in her mind that this person Ronnie W. Long was the person who entered her house." J.A. 1433; see also J.A. 314-15 ("I will never forget his profile, the coloring of his skin .... Another reason, his mannerisms and the way he walked.... I knew his voice.... One thing I will never forget, the way he talked to me.... Another way I identified him was the way he carried himself."). Officers took her to the police station, where she again identified Long in a photographic lineup.

After Mrs. Bost identified Long as her rapist, the officers asked him to come to the police station. Long drove himself to the station, where he waived his rights and permitted a search of his car. The search revealed a pair of black gloves over the visor, a green toboggan under the driver's seat, and several matchbooks. The officers seized these items, as well as Long's leather jacket. One of the officers, Officer Isenhour, took impressions of the bottoms of Long's shoes. Long was arrested and charged with burglary and rape.

B. Long's trial

Long's trial began in Cabarrus County Superior Court in September 1976. On the first day, Long's trial counsel moved to suppress Mrs. Bost's courthouse and photographic identifications, arguing that they were impermissibly tainted by the officers' actions. After permitting the parties to question Mrs. Bost outside the presence of the jury, the court denied Long's motions.

In its case in chief, the State called Mrs. Bost along with her examining physician and several law enforcement officers. Mrs. Bost identified Long as her attacker, pointing to him in the courtroom. Long's defense had several components. First, he sought to impeach Mrs. Bost's testimony on the grounds that cross-racial eyewitness identification is often suspect. Second, the defense pointed to the lack of any physical evidence tying him to the crime scene. Third, Long introduced testimony about his whereabouts on the evening of the crime to establish an alibi.³

The jury convicted Long of both burglary and rape. He was sentenced to two life terms in prison, and his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal by the Supreme Court of North Carolina. North Carolina v. Long, 293 N.C. 286, 237 S.E.2d 728 (1977).

C. Disclosure of new evidence

In the years that followed, Long filed unsuccessful post-conviction petitions in state and federal court, including a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 federal habeas application. North Carolina v. Long, 377 S.E.2d 228 (Mem.) (N.C. 1989); Long v. Dixon, Civ. No. C-89-278-S (M.D.N.C. May 3, 1990). Then, in 2005, he moved in state...