Rivers v. Smith
| Decision Date | 07 December 2015 |
| Docket Number | 13-CV-00549 (NGG) (LB) |
| Parties | SHERMAN RIVERS, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH T. SMITH, Superintendent, Shawangunk Correctional Facility, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Sherman Rivers ("Petitioner," or "Rivers") brings this pro se Petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his 2006 state conviction for arson in the second degree. He asserts four claims: (1) that the prosecution's cross-examination regarding criminal acts and convictions of individuals known to him but unrelated to the crime with which he was charged denied him due process and a fair trial; (2) that he was deprived of a fair trial by the court's interested-witness jury instruction; (3) ineffective assistance of counsel; and (4) actual innocence. For the reasons set forth below, Rivers's Petition is DENIED.
In February 2001, Licelle Garrett ("Garrett") and her two children moved into an apartment located at 86 Himrod Street in Brooklyn, New York ("86 Himrod"). 1 Rivers was the manager of the building, responsible for collecting rent, paying bills associated with the building (such as mortgage payments), andoverseeing building maintenance. (Id. at 349.) Garrett paid approximately $450 per month for the apartment. (Id. at 223.) The small room she rented lacked windows and abutted the backyard of the apartment. (Id. at 222.) The door separating Garrett's apartment from the rest of the building did not have a lock, because Rivers had two dogs and wanted to be able to access the backyard. (Id. at 222-23.)
At trial, Garrett testified that the living conditions at the time she moved into 86 Himrod were "all right" (id. at 225), and that "it was livable for [her] and [her] children" (id. at 252). However, the conditions of Garrett's apartment deteriorated over the following months. As Garrett testified: (Id. at 226-27.) She further described that in the winter following her move, the apartment was without heat on three or four occasions, that the stove was completely non-functional, and that water from the toilet on the floor above leaked into her bathroom. (Id. at 227-28.) Garrett complained to Rivers about these problems, but Rivers did nothing to ameliorate the situation. (Id. at 228-29.)
In or around October 2001, Garrett's two children were diagnosed with lead poisoning. (Id. at 228-29; 250-51.) Garrett suspected that her children's illness stemmed from the conditions of the apartment (id. at 229), and she stopped paying rent because of this suspicion (id. at 228-29). Garrett relayed her concerns about the situation to Rivers, but he refused to correct the lead problem (or any of the other problems about which Garrett complained) until Garrett settled her arrears. (Id. at 228-29.) On one occasion, Rivers told Garrett to bring the lead poisoning issue to the attention of Elvis McKnight ("McKnight") (id. at 229), the owner of the building (id. at 345, 349), and the father of Rivers's then-girlfriend, Zakkyah McKnight (id.at 350). Around this time, Rivers told McKnight that he wanted Garrett out of the building due to her failure to pay rent. (Id. at 354.)
After Garrett's children became sick with lead poisoning and her efforts to informally reconcile the situation with Rivers proved fruitless, she filed a claim against Rivers in landlord-tenant court. (Id. at 228-29.) However, Rivers never appeared, despite being served on several occasions. (Id. at 229-30.) As McKnight explained, Rivers told him that he and Garrett "had a conversation about the going to court and he's not going to court." (Id. at 356.)
Garrett's decision to withhold her rent led to an immediate escalation of her problems with Rivers. She explained at trial:
(Id. at 232.) Rivers's hostility toward Garrett manifested itself in other ways, as well. On one occasion, Rivers turned off the electricity in Garrett's unit, temporarily forcing her to move her family into her sister's nearby apartment. (Id. at 234.) Garrett's sister instructed her to contact the police and return with them to 86 Himrod; when she did, she discovered that Rivers had also changed the lock to the front door. (Id.) Though Rivers eventually restored Garrett's electricity and provided her with a new key to the apartment, Garrett felt that ultimately the police involvement led to a further worsening of her relationship with Rivers. (Id. at 235.)
On November 1, 2001, Joseph Truglio ("Truglio"), an inspector from the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development ("HPD"), visited 86 Himrod. (Id. at 203-04.)2 Truglio's investigation revealed that no corrective measures had been taken, despite Rivers's awareness of the numerous lead paint violations. (Id. at 206-07.) Truglio then assessed the scope of the efforts needed to fix the violations and estimated that the cost of repairs would be "in the thousands." (Id. at 207.)
The following day, November 2, 2001, Garrett left her apartment at approximately 8:00 a.m. to drop off her children at day care. (Id. at 238.) At some point thereafter, a fire broke out in Garrett's room. (Id. at 395.) Battalion Chief Anthony Devita ("Devita") of the New York City Fire Department ("FDNY") and approximately forty firefighters responded to the scene thatafternoon. (Id. at 394-97.) Devita and the rest of his battalion successfully extinguished the fire, and Devita subsequently entered the building to investigate the cause of the blaze. (Id. at 402-03.) Because Devita was unable to determine the cause, he submitted a "code 1041" to the Bureau of Fire Investigation, signaling that the fire was "suspicious or undetermined in nature." (Id. at 403.)
Kevin Dolan ("Dolan"), a New York City fire marshal, responded to Devita's code 1041 that same day. (Id. at 307.) At trial, Dolan testified about the different causes of fire he encountered in his work:
(Id. at 306.) Following his investigation, Dolan determined that the fire had originated on top of the mattress in Garrett's bedroom and moved to the contents of the room. (Id. at 309-11.) He ruled out accidental causes because there were neither electrical outlets near the mattress, nor any evidence of careless smoking. (Id. at 311.) Likewise, Dolan ruled out natural causes, as there was no lightening or other "act of God" observed on the day of the fire. (Id.) Accordingly, Dolan reported that the fire was "nonaccidental." (Id.) At trial, Dolan testified that the fire could have been started by a lit cigar or cigarette placed against the mattress, and that, depending on the material of the mattress and the bedding, a fire set in such a manner could smolder for up to an hour or, alternatively, accelerate in about a minute. (Id. at 314.)
Garrett returned to 86 Himrod at approximately 4:45 p.m. to find the investigation in progress. (Id. at 238.) She immediately entered the building and made for the basement, where Rivers's room, among others, was located. (Id.) Unable to locate Rivers, Garrett insteadconfronted another individual who lived in the building, Anthony Prescod ("Prescod"), attempting to determine the cause of the fire which had destroyed her apartment. (Id. at 239.) At that time, Rivers and his girlfriend emerged from Rivers's apartment; and Garrett immediately confronted him about the fire. At trial, Garrett described the encounter:
(Id. at 239-40.) Rivers and his girlfriend then left the building and drove off in a car. (Id. at 241.) Her former residence rendered uninhabitable, Garrett and her children were forced to move into a Red Cross hotel, and later a homeless shelter. (Id. at 243.)
In January 2002, McKnight attempted to collect money for the fire damage from the insurance company. (Id. at 360.) However, the insurance company explained that they had not received any premium payments and therefore were not obligated to cover the fire damage. (Id.) McKnight confronted Rivers, who was responsible for paying the insurance premiums out of the rent he collected from tenants. (Id. at 361.) McKnight described this interaction at trial:
To continue reading
Request your trial