Pinckney v. Lee
| Decision Date | 19 October 2020 |
| Docket Number | 10-CV-01312 (KAM) |
| Parties | COMFORT PINCKNEY, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM LEE, Superintendent of Green Haven Correctional Facility, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
In 2010, petitioner Comfort Pinckney ("petitioner"), proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the constitutionality of his 2003 state court conviction for Murder in the Second Degree, Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, and Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree. (ECF No. 1, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Pet.") 1.) William Lee, the nominal respondent ("respondent"), opposes the petition as procedurally barred and without merit.1 (See ECF No. 9 (ECF pp. 17-74), Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Petition ("Opp.").)
On March 6, 2013, the court entered an order staying proceedings in order to allow petitioner to exhaust his remedies in state court. (Dkt. Order, dated March 6, 2013.) This case has been stayed ever since, with only intermittent docket activity. Petitioner's efforts to seek relief in state court remain pending. Nevertheless, as discussed below, this case is now ripe for adjudication of all claims asserted. In addition, petitioner moved to amend his original petition on October 2, 2019. (ECF No. 63, Motion to Amend Petition, dated Oct. 2, 2019 ("Mot. Amend").) The court will address petitioner's Motion to Amend herein. For the reasons discussed below, the petition is DISMISSED in its entirety, and petitioner's motion to amend his habeas petition is DENIED.
Petitioner was convicted for the murder of Michael Hammonds, who was shot in the face at point blank range. On May 6, 2000, past midnight, Mr. Hammonds met up with his friends, Carmain Desir and Prague Alexander,2 for a drink at Tony's SportsBar in Jamaica, Queens. (Trial Tr. 296-97, 345.)3 Desir and Hammonds went inside the bar, although Alexander did not. (Id. 297-98.) At around 2:00 or 2:30 am, Desir and Hammonds decided to leave the bar to buy cigarettes at a nearby 24-hour bodega. (Id. 297-99.) As they were walking down a well-lit street, toward the store, Desir observed petitioner and another male "about to fight" across the street. (Id. 300-01.) In his trial testimony, Desir vividly recalled petitioner's appearance that night, specifically his "[l]ow caeser, low, low haircut," and "green T shirt with a pocket on the left hand side and black jeans[.]" (Id. 302.)
Once it became clear the petitioner's dispute with the other male had deescalated, Desir and Hammonds turned around to return to the bar. (Trial Tr. 304-05.) Petitioner, however, turned his attention to Desir, expressing agitation that Desir was looking in his direction. (Id. 305.) Petitioner approached Desir in a belligerent posture, and the two nearly came to blows. (Id. 305-06.) As petitioner and Desir came face-to-face, Desir was able to closely observe the petitioner'sappearance. (Id. 307-08.) Desir also paid close attention to petitioner's hand and arm movements, and noticed him take off a silver watch with a blue head. (Id. 309.) The two men exchanged heated words for several minutes, until Hammonds interceded, at which point Hammonds began to exchange words with petitioner. (Id. 311-14.)
Just as the confrontation seemed to wane, petitioner demanded that Desir and Hammonds "wait here." (Id. 315.) Petitioner walked to his "American made," "burgundy four-door car," parked down the block from the store. (Id. 315-16.) According to Desir, petitioner then opened the glove compartment, removed "something black with a handle" that he placed in his waist, and walked back towards Desir and Hammonds. (Id. 315, 317-18.) Petitioner and Hammonds resumed their argument, which lasted several more minutes, while petitioner adjusted the object in his waist. (Id. 318-20.) Desir was "right in their face" during the entirety of the exchange. (Id. 322.) Several parties also tried to intervene and lower the tension, to no avail. (Id. 322-23.)
Hammonds then asked petitioner "what the fuck" he was talking about. (Trial Tr. 324.) Petitioner stepped back, turned around, placed his hands on his waist, and pull out a black semiautomatic weapon. (Id. 324.) Desir was approximately three feet from petitioner at the time, but turned and fled themoment petitioner pulled the weapon from his waist, before any shots were fired. (Id. 324-26.) As Desir fled, he heard shots fired, and saw petitioner with his arm extended in a firing motion, but did not actually see the weapon as it discharged. (Id. 327-28.) When Desir returned to the scene shortly after, a crowd had gathered around, and he learned that Hammonds had been shot. (Id. 329.)
Prior to the shooting, Prague Alexander also encountered petitioner outside the bodega, and approached him under the assumption that it was another man, petitioner's brother "Unique Pinckney." (Trial Tr. 447-48.) When petitioner turned around, Alexander realized that it was Unique Pinckney's brother, petitioner. (Id.) Alexander greeted him, and the two spoke briefly. (Id. 451, 483.) Alexander witnessed part of the verbal altercation between Desir and petitioner, but knew little of the situation. (Id. 452-58.) Alexander decided to return to the bar, but when he realized that Desir and Hammonds were not following him, he turned around and began heading back to the bodega. (Id. 457-58.) As he approached the bodega, Alexander witnessed the petitioner pull a gun out of his waistband, walk up to Hammonds, and shoot him. (Id. 458-59.) After Hammonds fell to the ground, petitioner approached Alexander, stuck the gun in his ribs, and asked him if he had seen anything. (Id.461.) Alexander said no, and the petitioner left. Thereafter, Alexander called the police from a payphone. (Id. 461-62.)
Garfield Smith was working as a bouncer at Tony's sports bar the night of the shooting. (Trial Tr. 495.) After hearing a "pop," Smith left the bar to look outside. (Id. 495-96.) Smith looked down the block, and saw a milk truck that would come to the area every night around 2:00 a.m., and two black men walking away from a motionless body. (Id. 497-98.) The two men entered a red or maroon Ford Taurus, and drove away from the scene. (Id. 498-500.) After the car pulled away, Smith walked down the block to the area outside the bodega, where a crowd had gathered, and saw Hammonds' body laying on the ground. (Id. 495-96.) Smith recalled that Hammonds had been inside the bar earlier with a friend, and left after only a few minutes. (Id.)
Smith returned to Tony's to secure the bar. (Trial. Tr. 501.) Shortly after, Smith saw a red Ford Taurus, which "looked very much []like" the car that had pulled away moments earlier, circle back to the scene. (Id. 502-03.) Although Smith looked down at the floor to avoid making eye contact with the vehicle's occupants, he managed to obtain the first part of the vehicle's license plate number: "T11." (Id. 503-04.) He also observed that there were no screws to hold down the bottom of the plate. (Id. 504.)
Vincent Johnson was also present in the area around the time of the shooting. Johnson was delivering milk to the bodega, unloading milk onto a handcart, when he heard a "pop." (Trial Tr. 415-418.) When he turned around, he saw a man lying on the ground with blood "coming out of his eye." (Id. 417-18, 435-36.) Johnson turned away out of fear for his safety, and therefore, did not have a clear glimpse at the assailant's face. (Id. 418, 422.) With his peripheral vision, however, Johnson saw the gunman put his arm around another person, threatening, in sum and substance, to shoot him if he spoke to the authorities. (Id. 418, 422.) He then observed the gunman walk to a "red or maroon," four-door Ford vehicle, and enter on the passenger side. (Id. 423.)
Police and Emergency Medical Services personnel responded to the shooting, and arrived at the scene outside the bodega to find Hammonds lying on his back, with a gunshot wound to his face. (Trial Tr. 236-38, 250-53, 424.) Hammonds was taken to a local hospital, where doctors determined that he was brain dead. (Id. 241, 411, 596.) Hammonds died after his family decided to remove him from life support. (Id.)
The police recovered a 9-millimeter bullet and a 9-millimeter shell casing from the crime scene, leading them to conclude that a 9-millimeter semi-automatic gun was the murderweapon. (Trial Tr. 279-80, 402-04.) NYPD Detective John Moeser was assigned to the case and focused on locating the red getaway car, based on Smith's partial description. (Id. 543-44.) After running the vehicle's make, model, color, and partial license plate information through the Department of Motor Vehicles database, Detective Moeser identified a red Ford Taurus with license plate T116RC, registered to owner William Campbell. (Id. 544-47.) Detective Moeser arrived Mr. Campbell's Brooklyn address at around 7:00 p.m. on May 6, 2000, and found Mr. Campbell standing next to the vehicle. (Id. 544-46.) Detective Moeser also learned that Mr. Campbell's wife was Shari Pinckney, petitioner's sister. (Id. 546-47.) After conversing with Mr. Campbell and Ms. Pinckney, Detective Moeser had the vehicle towed back to the garage for the NYPD 105th Precinct. (Id. 546-48.) Subsequently, Mr. Smith, the bouncer who reported a partial license plate of the vehicle at the scene of the shooting, was escorted by the police to the garage, and his attention was directed to the impounded vehicle. (Id. 504-05.) After studying the vehicle, Mr. Smith confirmed that it was the same car he had observed the gunman enter into and leave in. (Id. 546-48.)
The NYPD arrested petitioner on May 9, 2000, and escorted him to the 105th...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Khan v. Capra
...this "confirmatory identification" exception to the CPL § 710.30(1)(b) notice requirement. See Pinckney v. Lee, No. 10-cv-01312 (KAM), 2020 WL 6136302, at *27 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2020) (rejecting petitioner's federal habeas claim seekingreview of trial counsel's failure to object to state co......