Menzies v. Crowther
| Decision Date | 11 January 2019 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 03-CV-0902-CVE-FHM |
| Citation | Menzies v. Crowther, Case No. 03-CV-0902-CVE-FHM (D. Utah Jan 11, 2019) |
| Parties | RALPH LEROY MENZIES, Petitioner, v. SCOTT CROWTHER, Warden of the Utah State Prison, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Utah |
This matter comes before the Court on a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus(Dkt. # 109) filed by Utah death row inmate, Ralph Leroy Menzies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.Petitioner, who appears through counsel, challenges his conviction and sentence in the Third District Court of Salt Lake County, State of Utah, Criminal Case No. 86-887.Respondent filed a response (Dkt. # 123) to the second amended petition, and petitioner filed a reply (Dkt. # 127).The state court record has been produced.1The Court considered all of these materials in reaching its decision.For the reasons discussed below, the Court concludes the petition should be denied.
Historical facts found by the state court are presumed correct, unless the petitioner rebuts the same by clear and convincing evidence.28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1).Since petitioner has failed to rebut the facts, as set forth by the Utah Supreme Court, this Court hereby adopts the factual findings which the Utah Supreme Court found were "largely undisputed."2
Menzies II, 889 P.2d at 396-97()(citation omitted).
Id.The matter was remanded "to the trial court to conduct proceedings to correct the record, pursuant to rule 11(h) of the Rules of the Utah Supreme Court."Id.Additionally, the trial court was directed to rule on petitioner's "motion for a new trial and to resolve all issues relating to the qualifications of the court reporter and the adequacy of the transcript."Id.After several hearings, the trial court denied the motion, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed, ordering petitioner to proceed with the appeal on the merits.Id. at 242.
Thereafter, petitioner raised forty-four issues on appeal.See Brief of Appellant filed on September 14, 1992(Dkt. # 110, Disk # 1, Related Appeals/Direct Appeal, Dkt. # 100).The Utah Supreme Court's majority opinion addressed only the following claims of error on appeal: (1) failure to remove five jurors for cause; (2) failure to grant a mistrial following "surprise" testimony by Tim Larrabee; (3) admission of preliminary hearing testimony of a jailhouse informant; (4) considerationof a heinousness aggravating circumstance during the penalty phase; (5) admission of victim impact evidence during the penalty phase; and (6) use of the incorrect standard in sentencing petitioner to death.The remaining claims were all denied as being without merit.The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the sentence and conviction.Menzies II, 889 P.2d at 406-07.
On April 20, 1995, petitioner, who was represented by attorneys acting probono, initiated postconviction proceedings in the state district court.Petitioner amended his petition on May 2, 1995, asserting seventy-three separate claims for relief, including claims that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance.Menzies v. Galetka(Menzies III), 150 P.3d 480, 489-90(2006).
On March 3, 1998, Edward K. Brass was appointed by the state court to represent petitioner in all...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting