Sain v. Colson

• Decision Date: 05 January 2012
• Docket Number: Case No. 3:11-cv-834
• Parties: GREGORY L. SAIN, Petitioner, v. ROLAND COLSON, Respondent.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Tennessee

GREGORY L. SAIN, Petitioner,

v.ROLAND COLSON, Respondent.

Case No. 3:11-cv-834

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Dated: January 5, 2012

Judge Sharp

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Petitioner Gregory L. Sain was convicted and sentenced in January 2006 by the Circuit Court for Rutherford County in Murfreesboro, Tennessee after a jury trial. He is presently an inmate at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville, Tennessee. Now before the Court is his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1.)

I. BACKGROUND and PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Following a jury trial in the Rutherford County Circuit Court, petitioner Gregory L. Sain was found guilty on one count of delivery of a Schedule II drug to a minor, one count of possession of a Schedule II drug with intent to deliver, one count of introduction of contraband into a penal facility, one count of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, and one count of simple possession of marijuana.¹ Sain was originally sentenced as a persistent offender to twenty years in prison. After a successful appeal by the state, he was reclassified as a career offender for sentencing purposes, and his prison sentence was modified to thirty years. Sain was denied relief on direct appeal. State v. Sain, No. M2006-00865-CCA-R3-CD, 2008 WL 624924 (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. March 6, 2008). The Tennessee Supreme Court denied Sain's request for permission to appeal in July 2008. Sain then filed a petition for post-conviction relief in the Rutherford County Circuit Court. This petition was denied pursuant to an order dated February 19, 2010, and the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed. Sain v. State, No. M2010-00654-CCA-R3-PC, 2011 WL 1601566 (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. April 26, 2011). The Tennessee Supreme Court denied permission to appeal on August 25, 2011.

Sain promptly filed the instant petition for the writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) on August 31,2011, asserting the following grounds for relief:

(1) The trial court erred in denying the petitioner's motion to suppress prior to trial.

(2) The evidence was insufficient to support the petitioner's conviction of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

(3) The petitioner's trial counsel was ineffective in that he failed to request a Batson hearing after the prosecutor used a peremptory challenge against an African-American juror.

(4) The petitioner's trial counsel was ineffective in that he failed to conduct a proper investigation into the evidence and the petitioner's case and to develop an effective trial strategy.

(5) The petitioner's trial and appellate counsel were ineffective in failing to challenge an improper jury instruction, specifically, the trial court's instruction regarding the elements of the offense of knowingly delivering a controlled substance to a minor.

(See ECF No. 1, at 5–13.)

After the petition was filed and the petitioner submitted the requisite $5.00 filing fee, the Court conducted a preliminary examination thereof and determined that it stated colorable claims for relief. Accordingly, the Court entered an order (ECF No. 9) directing the respondent to answer, plead or otherwise respond to the petition. Rule 4, Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases.

The respondent submitted his answer (ECF No. 20) on November 29, 2011, to which the petitioner has offered no reply. Upon consideration of the petition, the answer, and the expanded record, the Court finds that an evidentiary hearing is not needed in this matter. See Smith v. United States, 348 F.3d 545, 550 (6th Cir. 2003) (an evidentiary hearing is not required when the record conclusively shows that the petitioner is not entitled to relief). Therefore, the Court shall dispose of the petition as the law and justice require. Rule 8(a), Rules Gov'g § 2254 Cases.

II. FINDINGS OF FACT

A. Evidence Presented at Trial

The facts underlying the petitioner's conviction were summarized by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals as follows:²

Merissa Allen testified that she was born on September 19, 1986, and was seventeen years old on September 4, 2004, the date of her encounter with Defendant [Sain]. Ms. Allen said that she went to the Murfreesboro Billiards Club to meet friends. Approximately one hour after she arrived at the club, Ms. Allen went to the parking lot to get something out of her car. A grey vehicle pulled up behind her car. Ms. Allen said that the driver, whom she later identified as Defendant, was the only occupant of the vehicle. Defendant asked Ms. Allen if she knew of any other clubs in the area because he had just been evicted from the Country Club. Ms. Allen told Defendant that Conrad's was located in the Holiday Inn next to the interstate. Ms. Allen said that Defendant handed her something wrapped in a paper towel. Defendant told Ms. Allen to take the package and he would be back later. Ms. Allen said that she felt uncomfortable and scared. Ms. Allen memorized the license tag number of Defendant's vehicle before going back inside the club.

Ms. Allen told Dorothy Foster and Rita Dunn, the co-owners of the club, about the incident, and Ms. Foster called the police. Officer Sean Patrick Garrison with the Murfreesboro Police Department responded to the call approximately five to ten minutes later. Ms. Allen gave the package to Officer Garrison and told him Defendant's license tag number. Ms. Allen believed that Officer Garrison performed a field test on the substance in the package. Ms. Allen said that Officer Garrison then drove to Conrad's to try to locate Defendant's vehicle.

Ms. Allen went back inside the club and joined her friends at a table. A few minutes later, Defendant walked into the Billiards Club and sat down at the bar. Ms. Allen pointed out Defendant to Ms. Foster. Defendant then left the club. Officer Garrison returned to the club, and Ms. Allen identified Defendant's vehicle as it was leaving the club's parking lot. Officer Garrison followed Defendant in his patrol car. A short time later, Officer Garrison returned to the club with Defendant in the back seat of his patrol car. Ms. Allen identified Defendant as the person who had handed her the package earlier that evening.

On cross-examination, Ms. Allen said that her car was parked approximately thirty to forty feet from the entrance of the club and the parking lot was lit. Ms. Allen acknowledged that Defendant did not ask for her name, and she did remember Defendant asking to see her later that night. Ms. Allen said that Defendant did not ask for any money in exchange for the package. Ms. Allen said that Defendant did not approach her when he returned to the Billiards Club.

Officer Garrison testified that he spoke with Ms. Allen who told him that a man had approached her in the club's parking lot and had handed her a wrapped package. Officer Garrison said that Ms. Allen told him that the man had said that Ms. Allen should come to Conrad's later if she "wanted to have a good time because he had $300 worth more with him." Ms. Allen told Officer Garrison that the man was an African-American and was driving a silver car with a Tennessee license tag number of LQD 477. Officer Garrison said that the package contained a white powdered substance which he believed was cocaine.

Officer Garrison drove to Conrad's but did not locate the vehicle described by Ms. Allen. He returned to the Billiards Club to fill out an offense report, and Ms. Allen told him that Defendant had returned to the club but had left again. Officer Garrison and Ms. Allen went outside to fill out the forms. Ms. Allen told Officer Garrison, "That's him right there. He's leaving in his car." Officer Garrison observed a silver Mercury Cougar with license tag number LQD 477 leave the parking lot.

Officer Garrison stated that he was approximately twenty feet from the vehicle. The drivers' side window was down, and Officer Garrison identified Defendant as the driver of the vehicle. Defendant did not stop his vehicle when Officer Garrison told him to

do so. Officer Garrison got into his patrol car and activated his emergency equipment and the video tape recorder inside the vehicle. Officer Garrison followed Defendant's vehicle through a restaurant parking lot and on to West College Street. Defendant stopped his vehicle about nine-tenths of a mile from the Billiards Club.

Officer Garrison asked Defendant what had transpired at the Billiards Club earlier that night. Defendant acknowledged that he had been at the club but denied any knowledge of the incident described by Officer Garrison. Officer Garrison said that Defendant's pockets contained small torn pieces of a paper towel that were similar to the paper towel package that Ms. Allen had showed him. Officer Garrison placed Defendant under arrest and drove Defendant back to the Billiards Club where Ms. Allen identified him as the individual who had given her the package earlier that evening.

Defendant was taken to the Rutherford County Sheriff's Department for booking. Defendant consented to a search of his person. During the search, Defendant was asked to bend over and squat. Officer Garrison said that he observed a clear plastic baggie protruding from Defendant's buttocks. Defendant resisted the jail personnel's attempt to remove the baggie and was pepper sprayed. Two baggies were removed from Defendant after he was pinned to the ground. The smaller baggie contained what appeared to be a white powder, and the larger baggie contained marijuana.

On cross-examination, Officer Garrison said that he did not run a field test to identify the substance of the package given to Ms. Allen. Officer Garrison said that he went out to his car to retrieve a property envelope in which to store the package. Officer Garrison acknowledged that Ms. Allen provided him more details concerning the motor vehicle driven by Defendant than Defendant's personal appearance.

Deputy Charles Owens with the Rutherford County Sheriff's Department was on duty when Def...