Walker v. Bartowski

• Decision Date: 20 May 2014
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 11-0400 (ES)
• Parties: CLINT WALKER, Plaintiff, v. GREG BARTOWSKI, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

CLINT WALKER, Plaintiff, v. GREG BARTOWSKI, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 11-0400 (ES)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Dated: May 20, 2014

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

OPINION

Salas, District Judge

Petitioner Clint Walker ("Petitioner") filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a), challenging a judgment of conviction entered by the Superior Court of New Jersey against him for his role in a robbery. Petitioner brings a host of challenges relating to his trial, sentencing, and direct appeal. While Petitioner focuses on conflicting identification statements by the victim of the robbery, and attempts to point to constitutional error by the New Jersey courts, all of his claims are without merit. For the reasons detailed below, the Petition will be denied, and no certificate of appealability will issue. Petitioner's application for appointment of pro bono counsel will be denied as moot.

I. BACKGROUND

Although the facts relating to Petitioner's conviction are straightforward, the procedural history of his state court proceedings is convoluted. Moreover, Petitioner raised his claims before the state courts in a piecemeal fashion. Accordingly, to provide the reader with a clear understanding of the pertinent aspects of Petitioner's case, this Court presents the background infour sections. First, the Court recounts the pre-trial investigation and arrest of Petitioner and his co-defendant Kenneth Grady. Second, the Court discusses the jury trial before the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County ("trial court"), at which both defendants were convicted. Third, the Court recounts the substance of Petitioner's direct appeal of his conviction to the New Jersey Appellate Division. And, finally, the Court addresses Petitioner's post-conviction relief ("PCR") proceedings before the trial court ("trial-level PCR court") and the Appellate Division.

A. Pre-Trial Investigation and Arrest

On January 12, 2003, sixty-nine year-old Allen Cobb was robbed by two men as he loaded groceries into his van outside a supermarket in West Orange, New Jersey. State v. Walker, 2006 WL 1418632, at *1 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. May 25, 2006) (D.E. No. 22-8). The two men were subsequently identified as Petitioner and his co-defendant Kenneth Grady. Id. Cobb testified that the two men approached him, one on each side. Id. Importantly, Cobb noticed that the men played different roles in the robbery. Id. The man on Cobb's left checked Cobb's pockets, taking his car keys and wallet. Id. The wallet contained approximately $120 cash, Cobb's credit cards, and his identification. Id. Unlike the man on Cobb's left, the man on Cobb's right "jacked" a sawed-off shotgun that was protruding from under the assailant's coat. Id. After Cobb told both men that he had no more money, they drove away with his wallet and keys in a gray car, license plate number KGJ89P. Id.

Once the two men drove off, Cobb called the police from inside the supermarket. Id. Officer Michael Mastras was the first to arrive on the scene—within three minutes of Cobb's call. Armed with the get-a-way vehicle's license plate number, Officer Mastras "alert[ed] allunits to keep an eye out for the vehicle." Id. (alteration in original). Mastras also discovered that the license plate was from an older Nissan Stanza, last registered to Crystal D. Braxton in May of 2001. Id.

Meanwhile, Cobb gave a sworn statement to Detective Joseph Spero ("Detective Spero" or "Spero") at the police headquarters. Id. at *2. In his statement, Cobb described both men as black males in their twenties—one with "crazy looking hair and the other guy [ ]as a lighter skinned male with a mustache." Id. Although Cobb was shown two books containing numerous photographs, he did not make a positive identification at that time. Id.

On the same day that he took Cobb's statement, Detective Spero spoke to Crystal Braxton about the Nissan Stanza. Id. Braxton stated that she was no longer in possession of the plates or the car. Id. According to Braxton, while she originally used the plates on the car, she abandoned the car (and plates) in 2000 when the car became disabled. Id.

Shortly thereafter, Cobb informed Spero that $260 had been withdrawn from Cobb's bank account with the stolen ATM card. Id. The ATM machine was at Newark Penn Station. Id.

Several days later, Detective Spero learned that Petitioner shared an address with Crystal Braxton, and that Petitioner's co-defendant Grady, lived in East Orange or Orange, New Jersey. Id. This discovery led Detective Spero to speak with Braxton a second time. Id. This time, Braxton stated that Petitioner was her fiancée and that he had been living with her. Id. In addition, Braxton told Spero that Petitioner was with her in 2000, when her vehicle became disabled. Id. Presented with a photograph of Grady, Braxton also identified Grady as one of Petitioner's friends that she knew. Id. She signed and dated the back of the photograph. Id.

Spero then called Cobb to the police station for a photo array including Petitioner and Grady's photographs. Id. Detective Matthew Palardy of a neighboring police department showed Cobb two photo line-ups, featuring six-person photo arrays.¹ Id. Viewing the first photo array, Cobb identified Petitioner as one of the assailants and signed the back of Petitioner's photograph. Id. Cobb stated, "that's the guy who pointed the gun at me." Id. In the second photo array, Cobb identified Grady as "the guy who went through my pockets or took my money." Id. Cobb signed the back of Grady's photograph, as he did with the photograph of Petitioner. Id.

Thereafter, Detective Palardy informed Spero of the results of the photo arrays. Id. Based upon Cobb's identifications, Spero obtained two arrest warrants—one for Petitioner, and one for Grady. Id. Both were arrested on January 23, 2003. Id.

B. The Trial

Petitioner was tried before a jury on robbery, conspiracy, and gun possession charges, along with Grady as his co-defendant. Id. at *1. At the trial, issues arose with respect to Cobb's identification of the assailants. See id. at *3. When asked to identify both assailants in court, Cobb stated that he was only "reasonably sure" that Petitioner and Grady were the two men that robbed him. Id. He indicated that he believed that they were the assailants, but explained that they looked different than they had at the time of the robbery. See id. Cobb noted that "the hair is different on both men" and "[o]ne man probably looks like he gained a little weight." Id.

Notably, when Cobb was directed to the pictures from the photo array that he had signed, his testimony contradicted his prior statements to the police. See id. While he previously identified Petitioner as the assailant in the first photo array photograph, when presented with that same photograph in court, Cobb indicated that the photograph depicted Grady instead. See id. He, similarly, contradicted his prior statement regarding the second photograph, stating in court that it depicted Petitioner rather than Grady. See id. The natural consequence of Cobb's interchanging of the two defendants' photographs was that Cobb's trial testimony contradicted his prior statement regarding each defendant's respective role in the robbery. See id. So, according to Cobb's trial testimony, Grady was the one who held the sawed-off shotgun—not Petitioner.² See id.

Ultimately, the jury found Petitioner guilty of: first-degree robbery, third-degree unlawful possession of a weapon (sawed-off shotgun), second-degree possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, third-degree knowingly possessing a prohibited weapon, and second-degree possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. Id. at *1. He was acquitted of second-degree conspiracy to commit robbery. Id. The trial court sentenced Petitioner to fifty-years imprisonment with a requirement that he serve a minimum of 85% of his sentence per the No Early Release Act ("NERA"), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2. See id.

C. Direct Appeal

Petitioner appealed to the Appellate Division. In his direct appeal, Petitioner raised seven points. Id. His points encompass challenges to the trial court's jury instructions, severalof the court's rulings relating to his conviction, including an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, as well as challenges to his sentence. The Court addresses each category of challenges in turn.

1. Jury Instruction Challenges

Petitioner's first three points involved challenges to the trial court's jury instructions. See Walker, 2006 WL 1418632, at *3. First, he argued that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on two lesser-included offenses: the offense of theft and the offense of aggravated assault. Id. (Point I). Second, Petitioner argued that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on the law of prior inconsistent statements. Id. (Point II). Third, Petitioner argued that the trial court's jury instruction "that defendant was the actor"³ was in error. Id. (Point III).

The Appellate Division began its analysis of Petitioner's jury instruction challenges by first noting that Petitioner had not raised any of these challenges to the trial court. Id. at *4. Because Petitioner had not requested the lesser-included charges, the Appellate Division noted, the trial court was not required to instruct on those charges unless "the facts adduced at trial clearly indicate[d] that a jury could convict on the lesser while acquitting on the greater offense." Id. (citing State v. Jenkins, 840 A.2d 242 (2004); State v. Garron, 827 A.2d 243 (2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1160 (2004)). "Thus," the Appellate Division continued,

where the facts do not clearly raise the issue, and there is no request, there is no error in the failure to charge on the lesser offense. In such instances, a court need not sift through the record meticulously to find the few fragments which might suggest that a charge should be given.

Id.

After summarizing the trial court record, the...