Parsley v. Manna
| Docket Number | 19 Civ. 4756 (VB)(PED) |
| Decision Date | 02 May 2023 |
| Parties | CHARLES PARSLEY, Petitioner, v. J. LA MANNA, SUPERINTENDENT, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On March 16, 2012, a Westchester County jury convicted petitioner Charles Parsley (“petitioner” or “defendant”) of the crimes of second degree murder (two counts), first degree burglary, second degree attempted murder and first degree assault. He was sentenced on June 26, 2012 to an aggregate indeterminate term of seventy-five years to life imprisonment. Since his conviction, petitioner has been housed at Green Haven Correctional Facility in Stormville, New York.
Petitioner's conviction stemmed from his participation in a plot to murder Sandra Hackley. Ms. Hackley, her husband (Rafael Cornielle) and her two daughters (Juliandra Pena, age 12, and Jaylene Rodriguez, age 6) lived in an apartment off the lobby of 1159 Yonkers Avenue in Yonkers, New York. On the morning of April 21, 2010, Hackley and her family left the apartment per their usual daily routine. Hackley and Corneille drove their girls to school and went to their respective jobs. Around the same time, petitioner, Kasaun White and English Thomas left Long Island in Thomas' distinctive Ford F-150 truck bound for Hackley's apartment. Their movements that day were captured on security video at various points throughout the day, including video from the bridge they traversed on route to Yonkers and video surveillance in the lobby of Hackley's apartment building. Throughout the day, the lobby video showed petitioner and White repeatedly entering and exiting the building as they lay in wait for Hackley to return home. Petitioner entered the lobby for the last time at approximately 7:18 p.m. Hackley and her family returned home at approximately 7:26 p.m. Around five minutes later, White (disguised as a UPS delivery man and carrying a box) entered the building's vestibule and buzzed Hackley's apartment. Corneille buzzed White in, and propped open the door of the apartment with his body as White walked toward him. White told Corneille that Hackley had to sign for the package; at the same time, petitioner approached the door with his right hand inside his hoodie. Before Corneille could react, White (from the left) and petitioner (from the right) simultaneously converged on Cornielle and tried to push him back into the apartment. A struggle ensued petitioner pulled out a semi-automatic handgun and fired three shots at Corneille. One shot grazed his elbow; the other two hit him in the chest and right leg. Corneille, seriously wounded, pushed through the men and ran through the lobby, hoping to draw the men out of the building. Meanwhile, Hackley heard the commotion and gunfire and ran from the bathroom toward the front door. White immediately shot Hackley five times with his semi-automatic handgun, striking Hackley in her chest, abdomen and arm. At approximately 7:36 p.m., Hackley's twelve-year-old daughter (Pena) called 911. Police arrived and found Hackley's lifeless body lying in the front foyer of the apartment.
Presently before this Court is petitioner's pro se Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This petition is before me pursuant to an Order of Reference dated October 10, 2019 (Dkt. #11). For the reasons set forth below, I respectfully recommend that Your Honor deny the petition in its entirety.
Petitioner and White were arrested on May 20, 2010 and taken to the Yonkers Police Department, where they were placed in interview rooms and given drinks. Police seized the discarded drink cups and sent them to the Westchester County Forensic Lab for testing.
On July 6, 2010, the prosecution moved for an Order permitting the taking of a buccal swab from petitioner. In support of their application, the prosecution contended (inter alia): (1) investigators recovered cigarette butts and a partially smoked cigar with a plastic tip on the ground in the parking lot behind the victim's apartment building where petitioner and his cohorts waited to carry out their plot; and (2) the DNA profile from petitioner's discarded drink cup matched the DNA profile from the cigar tip. On July 19, 2010, the Westchester County Court granted the prosecution's application and ordered petitioner to submit to a buccal swab of his mouth. On July 28, 2010, a detective took a buccal swab from petitioner. At trial, a witness from the Westchester County Forensic Lab testified that the DNA profile obtained from petitioner's buccal swab matched the DNA profile from the cigar tip found at the scene.
Petitioner was tried jointly with co-defendant White; the co-defendants were represented by separate counsel. At the beginning of jury selection, White's attorney (Mr. Bartlett) requested that each defendant be allotted a full number of peremptory challenges. The court denied that request. On consent of petitioner and his counsel (Mr. Weinstein), Mr. Bartlett was chosen as the “spokesman” for defense counsel during the exercise of challenges.
Twelve jurors were chosen upon consultation and agreement of defense counsel. During selection of the first alternate juror, neither party challenged prospective juror Patricia Buitron for cause. After the prosecution did not exercise a peremptory challenge as to Buitron, the following colloquy took place:
Dkt. #32-3, at 10-11.[2] Petitioner's counsel did not object to the Court's dismissal of Buitron. Id. at 11.
Prospective juror Mangum was chosen as the first alternate juror. The following day, immediately prior to opening statements, juror number seven was discharged and replaced with the first alternate, Mangum.
Petitioner, by and through counsel, timely appealed his conviction to the Appellate Division, Second Department on the following grounds: (1) the prosecution failed to prove petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; alternatively, the verdict was against the weight of the evidence; (2) petitioner was deprived of a fair trial after Corneille's outburst during a break in his trial testimony,[3] when the court denied petitioner's motion for a mistrial without first conducting an inquiry to ascertain the effect of the outburst on four jurors who had not yet left the courtroom; (3) petitioner was denied due process and a fair trial as a result of the trial court's erroneous evidentiary rulings; and (4) petitioner's sentence was harsh and excessive. Dkt. #31-7, at 37-80. On or about August 23, 2016, petitioner submitted a pro se Supplemental Brief to the Second Department (Dkt. #31-9), wherein he argued that the trial court should have granted his motion to be tried separately from White. Dkt. #31-9, at 7-10. By Decision and Order dated May 10, 2017, the Second Department affirmed petitioner's conviction. People v. Parsley, 150 A.D.3d 894, 55 N.Y.S.3d 267 (2d Dep't 2017). Petitioner, by and through counsel, timely submitted an application for leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals, wherein he sought review of all of the claims raised in his initial appellate brief. Dkt. #31-12. The Court of Appeals denied petitioner leave to appeal on August 16, 2017. People v. Parsley, 29 N.Y.3d 1132, 86 N.E.3d 574, 64 N.Y.S.3d 682 (Table) (2017).
On or about October 30, 2018, by and through retained counsel, petitioner moved for a writ of error coram nobis on the ground that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise the following claims: (1) the County Court should have denied the prosecution's application for a buccal swab of petitioner because (a) the application was based, in material part, on the DNA from the drinking cup -which was obtained in violation of petitioner's reasonable expectation of privacy and (b) the prosecution failed to sufficiently specify the sources of information in its affirmation in support of its application; and (2) the trial court erroneously allowed the peremptory challenge against prospective juror Buitron. Dkt. #31-15, at 14-29. On January 23, 2019, the Second Department denied petitioner's application, finding he had failed to demonstrate that appellate counsel was ineffective. People v. Parsley, 168 A.D.3d 987, 90 N.Y.S.3d 565 (2d Dep't 2019). On May 7, 2019, the Court of Appeals denied petitioner leave to appeal the appellate court's denial of his coram nobis application. People v. Parsley, 33 N.Y.3d 1034, 126 N.E.3d 175 (Table), 102 N.Y.S.3d 525 (2019).
Meanwhile on or about April 25, 2019, petitioner submitted a pro se application for coram nobis relief on the ground that appellate counsel was ineffective because he failed to argue on direct appeal that the trial court violated New York C.P.L. § 310.30 by failing to provide “meaningful notice” to defense counsel...
To continue reading
Request your trial