Mahdi v. Stirling
Decision Date | 24 September 2018 |
Docket Number | C/A No. 8:16-3911-TMC |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina |
Parties | Mikal D. Mahdi, #5238, Petitioner, v. Bryan Stirling, Commissioner, South Carolina Department of Corrections; Willie D. Davis, Warden, Kirkland Correctional Institution, Respondents. |
This matter is before the court on Respondents' motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 105) and motion to strike (ECF No. 125). Petitioner Mikal D. Mahdi ("Mahdi") is a death-sentenced state prisoner who seeks relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2), D.S.C., pre-trial proceedings were referred to a magistrate judge. On September 24, 2018, the court withdrew the reference of this matter and now enters an order on the pending motions. (ECF No. 137). Having carefully considered the parties' submissions and the record in this case, the court grants Respondents' motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 105). In addition, Respondents' motion to strike (ECF No. 125) is granted in part and denied in part.
Mahdi v. State, 678 S.E.2d 807, 809 (S.C. 2009) (Toal, C.J., concurring) (footnote added).
On August 23, 2004, the Calhoun County grand jury indicted Mahdi for murder, grand larceny, and second degree burglary, and the State filed its Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty. (ROA 1829-35).2 The South Carolina Supreme Court ordered South Carolina Circuit Court Judge Clifton Newman to preside over Mahdi's case. (ROA 1841). Judge Newman appointed attorneys Carl Grant and Glenn Walters to represent Mahdi. (ROA 8). However, in 2016, upon Grant's motion and with the State and Mahdi's consent, the court relieved Mr. Grant as counsel because he had sustained a serious injury in a motorcycle accident. (ROA 104-05). Mr. Walters replaced Mr. Grant as lead counsel and the court appointed Joshua Koger, Jr., as second chair counsel. (ROA 109).
From November 26th to 29th, 2006, the parties engaged in individual voir dire and selected a capital jury. (ROA 207-1318). However, on November 30th, prior to the jury being sworn, Mahdi waived his right to a jury trial and pled guilty to all charges. (ROA 1336-68). Following themandatory twenty-four hour statutory waiting period, Mahdi's sentencing proceeding before Judge Newman began on December 4, 2006. (ROA 1372). As aggravating circumstances, the State alleged that Mahdi: (1) committed the murder during the commission of a burglary; (2) committed the murder during the commission of a larceny with a deadly weapon; (3) committed the murder during the commission of a robbery while armed with a deadly weapon; and (4) murdered a law enforcement officer during or because of the performance of his official duties. (ROA 1838). Judge Newman found the State proved the first two aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt and, after carefully considering all of the evidence, sentenced Mahdi to death. (ROA 1810-26).
On direct appeal, Mahdi raised one issue:
Did the trial judge improperly consider Mikal Mahdi's initial exercise of his constitutional right to a trial by jury in imposing a death sentence?
(ECF No. 31-1 at 3). On June 15, 2009, the South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed Mahdi's sentence. See Mahdi v. State, 678 S.E.2d 807 (S.C. 2009). (App. A000193).3 Mahdi did not appeal this decision, but moved for a stay of execution in order to pursue post-conviction relief ("PCR"). On July 23, 2009, the South Carolina Supreme Court granted Mahdi's motion and assigned South Carolina Circuit Court Judge Doyet A. Early, III, to preside over Mahdi's PCR action.
On August 18, 2009, Mahdi filed his initial PCR application pro se. (App. A000853-59). Through appointed counsel, Teresa Norris and Robert Lominack, Mahdi amended his application and raised the following grounds:
To continue reading
Request your trial