Pruitt v. State

• Decision Date: 06 May 2022
• Docket Number: W2019-00973-CCA-R3-PD
• Parties: CORINIO PRUITT v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
• Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals

CORINIO PRUITT v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

No. W2019-00973-CCA-R3-PD

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Jackson

May 6, 2022

Session May 4, 2021

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 06-00460 Chris Craft, Judge

Petitioner Corinio Pruitt, was convicted in 2008 of first degree felony murder and was sentenced to death. After Petitioner's conviction and sentence were affirmed by the Tennessee Supreme Court on direct appeal, Petitioner filed a post-conviction petition. After an extensive evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. In this appeal, Petitioner raises the following claims for relief: 1) the post-conviction judge erred by failing to recuse himself 2) Petitioner is ineligible for the death penalty due to his intellectual disability, and trial counsel were ineffective in their handling of Petitioner's intellectual disability claim at trial^[1]; 3) trial counsel were ineffective for failing to investigate and present additional mitigating evidence regarding Petitioner's traumatic social history mental health, and cognitive impairments; 4) the prosecutors abused their discretion by seeking the death penalty in this case, operated under a conflict of interest, and committed misconduct by exercising peremptory strikes against African-American jurors and making inappropriate statements and arguments, and trial counsel were ineffective for failing to raise appropriate objections to these issues; 5) trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance during the course of voir dire, trial, closing argument, and jury instructions during the guilt phase; 6) the death penalty is unconstitutional and is a disproportionate sentence in this case; and 7) the cumulative effect of these errors rendered Petitioner's trial fundamentally unfair. After a thorough examination of the briefs of the parties and amici curiae, the records of the post-conviction hearing and direct appeal, and the applicable law, this court affirms the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed

Kelly A. Gleason (on appeal and at hearing); Lucie T. Butner (on appeal); and Jonathan King and Barbara Sidelnik (at hearing), Assistant Post-Conviction Defenders, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Corinio Pruitt.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Andrée Sophia Blumstein, Solicitor General; Benjamin A. Ball, Assistant Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; and Steve Jones, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

J. David Wicker and Elizabeth Bowden, Nashville, Tennessee; Collin P. Wedel and Andrew B. Talai, Los Angeles, California; and Alex E. Sirio, Washington, D.C., for the amicus curiae, the Tennessee Conference of the NAACP.

David R. Esquivel, Sarah B. Miller, and Elizabeth Harwood, Nashville, Tennessee, for the amicus curiae, Just City.

Ross M. Johnson and Zachary Lawson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the amicus curiae, Tennessee Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty.

John S. Hicks, Nashville, Tennessee, for the amici curiae, the Arc of Tennessee, Professor Daniel Kiel, and Professor Steven J. Mulroy.

JILL BARTEE AYERS, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, P.J., and D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., J., joined.

OPINION

JILL BARTEE AYERS, JUDGE

Factual and Procedural Background

I. Trial and Direct Appeal

Petitioner Corinio Pruitt, was indicted for first degree felony murder and first degree premeditated murder for the death of the victim, Lawrence Guidroz. Both at trial and on direct appeal, Petitioner was represented by attorneys from the Shelby County Public Defender's Office. After a six-day trial in 2008, the jury found Petitioner guilty of felony murder and the lesser-included offense of second-degree murder, which was merged into his conviction for felony murder. The jury then imposed the death penalty after determining that the following aggravating factors outweighed any mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) Petitioner was previously convicted of one or more felonies, other than the present charge, whose statutory elements involve the use of violence to the person; (2) the murder was knowingly committed, solicited, directed, or aided by Petitioner, while Petitioner had a substantial role in committing, or attempting to commit, or was fleeing after having a substantial role in committing or attempting to commit a robbery; and (3) the victim was 70 years of age or older at the time of the murder. See T.C.A. § 39-13-204(i)(2), (7), (14). Petitioner's conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal by both this court and the Tennessee Supreme Court, with two Justices dissenting as to the proportionality of the death penalty. See State v. Pruitt, 415 S.W.3d 180 (Tenn. 2013), cert. denied sub nom Pruitt v. Tennessee, 134 S.Ct. 2874 (2014).

The Tennessee Supreme Court summarized the facts presented in the trial court as follows:

A. Evidence at Guilt Phase On the morning of August 2, 2005, Courtney Johnson encountered [Petitioner] by chance as he walked to the Apple Market on Winchester Road in Memphis, Tennessee. [Petitioner] talked about stealing a car and asked Mr. Johnson if he would get in the car with him if [Petitioner] took one. Although Mr. Johnson told [Petitioner] "no," he remained with [Petitioner] outside the market and spoke to people who came to the market, including [Petitioner]'s cousin, Michael Rockett. Later, Mr. Johnson's friend, "Sed," came to the market. [Petitioner] remained outside the market as Mr. Johnson and Sed walked to the Family Dollar store at the other end of the shopping center. Mr. Johnson testified that he went with Sed to the Family Dollar store because he did not want to be involved in whatever [Petitioner] was going to do. Taka Pruitt[, who is unrelated to Petitioner, ] arrived at the Apple Market with her neighbor. They parked directly outside the front door of the market. Ms. Pruitt stayed in the car while her neighbor went inside. As she waited in the car, she observed a "younger gentleman," later identified as [Petitioner], standing to the left of the door. Ms. Pruitt recognized him as someone who lived in her apartment complex. After five or six minutes, Ms. Pruitt saw an older man walk out of the market with groceries in his arms and walk to his car. As he reached the driver's side door, [Petitioner] ran up behind the older man and pushed him into the car. Although she could not see clearly into the car, it appeared to Ms. Pruitt that the two men were "tussling." She saw [Petitioner] on top of the older man, and she could see the older man's feet dangling out of the car. After about fifteen seconds, she saw [Petitioner] throw the older man to the ground, slam the car door, and drive away. When Ms. Pruitt checked on the victim, he was shaking and having trouble breathing and he was bleeding from his nose and both ears.

Ms. Pruitt ran inside the market, told employees that someone had just been carjacked, and asked them to call 911. She then ran back to the victim and called 911 on her cell phone. Ms. Pruitt went to the police station after the carjacking. She identified [Petitioner] from a photo lineup as the person who beat the victim and took the victim's car. At trial, Ms. Pruitt was shown a still photo created from the market's security camera video. She circled an image of [Petitioner], identifying him as the younger man she saw push the victim into his car. Ms. Pruitt also confirmed that [Petitioner] was alone when he attacked the victim.

Courtney Johnson testified that he saw the victim arrive at the Apple Market in a brown Chevrolet and walk into the market just before he and Sed went to the Family Dollar store. Mr. Johnson said that the victim appeared to be fine when he went into the Apple Market. Mr. Johnson and Sed were in the Family Dollar store for "three to four minutes." When they walked back in the direction of the Apple Market, Mr. Johnson saw "an old man laying down with blood coming out of his head, and his car was gone." [Petitioner] was also gone. Mr. Johnson said he ran inside the market and asked someone to call 911. He left the scene before the police arrived because he did not want to be involved and did not want to "snitch" on [Petitioner].

Memphis Police Officer Charmell Smith was the first officer on the scene and arrived before emergency medical personnel. She found the victim lying on his back on the ground and bleeding from his ears and mouth. She testified that the victim was "semi-conscious" and that she helped load the victim into an ambulance when it arrived. Based on her prior medical training as a certified nursing assistant, she opined that the bleeding from the ears indicated some kind of head trauma.

Thomas J. Leech III identified the victim, Mr. Lawrence Guidroz, from a still photo created from the Apple Market's security camera video. Mr. Leech testified that he had known Mr. Guidroz for more than twenty-five years and that he was very close to Mr. Guidroz. Mr. Leech went to the hospital to see Mr. Guidroz when he heard that Mr. Guidroz had been attacked. Mr. Leech remained in Mr. Guidroz's hospital room throughout the night. At no point was Mr. Guidroz able to communicate with Mr. Leech. Mr. Guidroz died the next day. Mr. Leech testified that Mr. Guidroz was seventy-nine years old at the time of his death. Mr. Guidroz was buried in Louisiana after a service in Memphis. Mr. Leech identified photographs of Mr. Guidroz's car, bearing the license plate number CUX 845.

Following the carjacking, Memphis Police began looking for the victim's car. Officer Jonas Holguin found the car parked at the Somerset Apartments near

...