Trueblood v. Inch
| Decision Date | 25 August 2021 |
| Docket Number | 4:20cv560/MW/EMT |
| Parties | WILMARIO DEVONDRIC TRUEBLOOD, Petitioner, v. MARK S. INCH, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Florida |
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner Wilmario Devondric Trueblood (Trueblood) filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1) and an accompanying memorandum of law (ECF No. 2). Respondent (the State) filed a response (ECF No. 11) and relevant portions of the state court record (ECF No. 11-1 through 11-19). Trueblood filed a reply (ECF No. 15).
The case was referred to the undersigned for the issuance of all preliminary orders and any recommendations to the district court regarding dispositive matters. See N.D. Fla Loc. R. 72.2(B); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)-(C) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). After careful consideration of the issues presented by the parties, it is the opinion of the undersigned that no evidentiary hearing is required for the disposition of this matter, Rule 8(a), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. It is also the opinion of the undersigned that Trueblood is not entitled to federal habeas relief.
The relevant aspects of the procedural background of this case are contained in the state court record (ECF No. 11-1, et seq.).[1] Trueblood challenges the judgments and life sentences entered in the Circuit Court for Leon County, Florida, after revocation of his probation in thirty-seven cases involving burglaries of unoccupied dwellings-thirty-two of which also included grand thefts-that occurred in 2010.[2] An amended violation of probation report was filed, along with an addendum, dated March 22, 2013, alleging that Trueblood violated Condition 5 of his probation, which required that he live and remain at liberty without violating the law, and Condition 6, which required that he not associate with persons engaged in criminal activity (ECF No. 11-1 at 131-32).
Prior to the hearing on the alleged violation of probation (VOP), Trueblood's conflict counsel on new burglary charges and on the VOP charges filed a motion on June 13, 2013, to incur costs for a second psychiatric evaluation (ECF No. 11-1 at 110-12). The motion was denied at a June 19, 2013, hearing (see id. at 14). On July 3, 2015, counsel filed a second motion for a second competency evaluation (id. at 149-52), stating that counsel had received a copy of the first competency evaluation performed on April 23, 2013, in which Michael D'Errico, Ph.D., found Trueblood competent to proceed, but counsel nevertheless had concerns over Trueblood's competency (id.). After a hearing held July 12, 2013, the motion for a second competency evaluation was denied (see id. at 254-57).
Additionally, Trueblood's motion to suppress statements and physical evidence obtained pursuant to a Terry stop in 2013 (ECF No. 11-1 at 159) was denied after a hearing (id. at 204, 274-356).[3] On October 3, 2013, an evidentiary hearing was held on the amended VOP report (ECF No. 11-1 at 367 to ECF No. 11-2 at 154). The prosecutor presented testimony from six burglary victims indicating that each of their residences had been burglarized and an item or items taken without their permission. Trueblood's probation officer testified that she provided detectives with Trueblood's locations, as recorded by the GPS monitoring system required by the conditions of his probation (ECF No. 11-2 at 21-23). Documents indicating his GPS locations, accurate within eighteen feet of the locations and dates of the incidents, were admitted (id. at 24-25) and showed that on the dates in question Trueblood was at or near the residences that were the subject of burglaries (id. at 27).
The prosecutor also presented evidence that Trueblood was stopped not far from one of the new burglaries and items taken in that burglary were found in his possession (ECF No. 11-1 at 371-72).[4] Tallahassee Police Investigator Michael Goldwich testified to five specific burglaries by address and case number that Trueblood confessed to in his interviews (ECF No. 11-2 at 109-112). A chart of fifty burglaries in 2012 and 2013, listing case number, address, date, time of offense, victim, and time Trueblood was present based on GPS monitoring records, was admitted (id. at 82-92, 398-99). Leon County Sheriff's Detective Jennifer Morris testified that in her interview of Trueblood on April 15, 2013, he confessed to nine different burglaries, which she identified by address and case number (id. at 41-57). Transcripts of Trueblood's statements to officers were admitted, having first been submitted in a motion to suppress hearing (id. at 60, 156-366).
As to Condition 6, evidence was presented that Trueblood confessed to committing burglaries with other persons. The evidence also included two letters to Tallahassee Police Investigator Michael Goldwich in which Trueblood confessed to participating in burglaries and identified the confederates involved with him in the burglaries (see ECF No. 11-2 at 91, 114, 375-97).
At the conclusion of the revocation hearing, the circuit court found that the State met its burden that Trueblood willfully and substantially violated his probation by committing new law violations in fifty-six burglaries and four grand thefts, thus proving violation of probation Condition 5 (ECF No. 11-2 at 123). The court also found the State proved one violation of Condition 6, that Trueblood associated with persons engaged in criminal activity (id.) Based on proof of violation of two conditions of probation, and after review of the sentencing scoresheet, the court revoked Trueblood's probation in each of the original thirty-seven cases and sentenced Trueblood to concurrent terms of life in prison in those cases (id. at 144-51).[5]
Direct appeal was taken to the Florida First District Court of Appeal (First DCA) in Case No. 1D13-4944. During the appeal, and pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, Trueblood filed a motion to correct sentencing error challenging the sentencing scoresheet (ECF No. 11-3 at 4). The First DCA returned jurisdiction to the circuit court where the state court approved a corrected scoresheet, which did not affect the overall sentence. On January 22, 2015, the circuit court announced corrected sentences by each count, rather than just the case number, resentencing Trueblood to life in prison on each count to be served concurrently (id. at 56-134). The appeal proceeded, and Trueblood's counsel filed an Anders brief noting no good faith grounds for appeal (ECF No. 11-4).[6] Trueblood was given leave to file a pro se brief but did not do so. The First DCA affirmed the judgments and sentences per curiam without discussion on November 16, 2015, and a mandate subsequently issued (ECF No. 11-6). See Trueblood v. State, 178 So.3d 404 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (Table).
On May 31, 2016, Trueblood filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the First DCA pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d) alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel (ECF No. 11-7). Trueblood argued that appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to argue that the trial court erred by not conducting a competency hearing required by state rules of procedure (id. at 10). The First DCA denied the petition on the merits on September 7, 2016 (ECF No. 11-8). See Trueblood v. State, 201 So.3d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). Trueblood's motion for rehearing (ECF No. 11-9 at 2) was denied on October 13, 2016 (id. at 6).
On March 6, 2017, Trueblood filed a pro se motion for postconviction relief in the state circuit court pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 (ECF No. 11-10 at 6). He raised five claims: (1) fundamental error and prosecutorial misconduct in using the GPS tracking system as proof of new law violations in his violation of probation hearing; (2) ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to move for a second evaluation and competency hearing prior to the violation of probation hearing; (3) ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to adequately prepare, investigate, or move for a continuance of the violation of probation hearing; (4) newly discovered evidence that all but two of the new law violation charges were later dismissed; and (5) cumulative error (id.).
An evidentiary hearing was held on the postconviction motion on December 22, 2017 (ECF No. 11-10 at 305-75). The state court denied the claims, stating its findings and reasoning on the record (id. at 371-74). A written order denying postconviction relief for the reasons stated on the record was entered on that same date (id. at 285).
Trueblood appealed to the First DCA in Case No. 1D18-213, and filed a pro se brief challenging the denial of grounds One and Two (ECF No. 11-13). The state filed an answer brief (ECF No. 11-14) to which Trueblood filed a reply brief (ECF No. 11-15). The First DCA affirmed without explanation in Trueblood v. State, 301 So.3d 905 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (ECF No. 11-16). Rehearing was denied on September 10, 2020 (Ex. 11-17 at 7), and the mandate issued October 1, 2020 (ECF No. 11-16 at 2).
On September 24, 2020, Trueblood filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Florida Supreme Court alleging manifest injustice (ECF No. 11-18). The petition was dismissed on October 19, 2020, as unauthorized (ECF No. 11-19). See Trueblood v. Inch, SC20-1432, 2020 WL 6130894 (Fla. 2020) (unpublished). (ECF No. 11-19).
On November 30, 2020, by the mailbox rule, Trueblood filed the instant pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1).
A federal court “shall not” grant a habeas corpus petition on...
To continue reading
Request your trial