Watkins v. Stephens

• Decision Date: 31 August 2015
• Docket Number: CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-1522
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
• Parties: LUKE WATKINS (TDCJ #1637637), Petitioner, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent.

LUKE WATKINS (TDCJ #1637637), Petitioner, v. WILLIAM STEPHENS, Director, Texas Department

of Criminal Justice - Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent.

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-1522

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

August 31, 2015

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION

The petitioner, Luke Watkins, an inmate at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Correctional Institutions Division ("TDCJ"), seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his state-court assault conviction. The respondent, William Stephens, has filed a motion for summary judgment, with a copy of the state court record,¹ and Watkins has filed a response. (Docket Entry Nos 10, 13,14).

Based on the pleadings, the state-court record, and the applicable law, the court grants the respondent's motion, denies the writ, and dismisses this case by separate order. The reasons are set out below.

I. Background

Watkins was indicted in Cause No. 09-05-05209-CR for assault causing bodily injury to Chandra Harvey, who was described as "a member of [Watkins's] family."² Watkins was chargedas a habitual offender based on a prior conviction for assaulting a family member.³ The indictment included allegations that his sentence was subject to enhancement based on three additional prior felony convictions for delivery of a controlled substance, arson, and driving while intoxicated.⁴ The jury found Watkins guilty on the assault charge and found that the enhancement allegations were true. Watkins received a 60-year prison sentence.⁵

On direct appeal, Watkins argued that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of his prior assaults on the same victim and that the evidence was insufficient to support the guilty verdict. The intermediate court of appeals rejected Watkins's claims and affirmed the conviction. The court summarized the facts presented at trial, as follows:

C.H., the complainant, has known Watkins since 2004. At the time of the assault they were common-law married, they introduced themselves as husband and wife, and others knew them as "Mr. and Mrs. Hammer." They were homeless. They had no children together.

C.H. contacted the district attorney's office and stated she did not want to participate in the trial. The district attorney's office subpoenaed C.H. She refused to attend the trial. Pursuant to a writ of attachment, law enforcement brought C.H. to the trial against her will. On the witness stand, C.H. cried and testified that she loves Watkins and "didn't want to go against him on this."

She acknowledged calling 9-1-1 in April 2009 from outside a Kroger store in Willis. She does not remember what she told the dispatcher because she was upset and "had been under the influence." She and Watkins had been arguing all day. She had become upset with him for eating all the chicken she had purchased. She grabbed his shirt and was "swinging at him[.]"

The assault occurred later that evening when she asked Watkins for twenty-five cents for a drink. She was "coming off of a binge." She rememberedspeaking with someone at the Kroger store, and being treated by EMS. She acknowledged reporting that Watkins had kicked her and hit her several times, and so it "probably" happened, although she didn't "remember it actually happened that way." C.H. testified that she did not file charges against Watkins. After confronting Watkins at the Kroger store she told him she loved him.

During the assault, C.H. suffered an injury to her nose. The injury to her nose hurt more the day after the assault, and took two weeks to heal. At trial, she initially refused to look at the photographs of her injuries. She explained that she still wants to be with Watkins, that she knows she's "better off without him, that he liked "to tell [her] how to act," and that "he do [esn]'t love [her] like [she] love[s] him."

The jury heard the recording of the 9-1-1 call. C.H. reported that her husband was Luke Watkins and he "beat [her]." She reported an injury to her head but stated she did not need an ambulance. She provided the dispatcher with an address, and stated that Watkins could be found inside a brown car at the residence.

Officer Brian Skero, a patrolman with the Willis Police Department, testified that he arrived quickly at the Kroger store. C.H. approached Skero's patrol car before he got out of the car. Skero testified it was obvious she had a "busted nose[.]" Blood was smeared across her face and hands. Concerned about the amount of blood, Skero told the dispatcher to notify Montgomery County EMS. Skero described C.H. as "emotionally distraught." She told him she was "assaulted" by Luke Watkins after she asked Watkins for twenty-five cents for a drink. Watkins had kicked her and punched her in the face. Skero, who had worked as a paramedic prior to becoming a patrolman, testified that C.H.'s injuries were consistent with her description of the assault. In addition to the injury to her face, C.H. had red marks and lacerations on her neck and chest consistent with a recent assault. C.H. told him that Watkins had kicked and punched her throughout her body. Skero did not smell alcohol on C.H.'s breath or notice any signs of intoxication.

C.H. provided Skero with an address where the assault had occurred, and she told Skero that Watkins could be found hiding in an abandoned car. Skero gave C.H. a statement form to fill out, and left her with Officer Tammy Towery, a deputy with the Montgomery County Sheriff's Department, who was working security at the store. Officer Towery testified she waited for EMS with C.H. while an officer went to locate the defendant. C.H. told her that her boyfriend had punched her in the face when she asked for twenty-five cents for a drink. Towery did not believe C.H. was intoxicated.

Skero drove to the address, which was about five blocks from the Kroger store. He found Watkins inside a vehicle parked outside a residence. Skero believed Watkins's mother owned the residence.

Watkins was in the driver's seat with his eyes closed, apparently sleeping. Skero knocked on the car window several times in a way that "would have woke anybody up." Watkins did not acknowledge him. Skero believed Watkins was pretending to sleep, because Watkins finally "woke up" but did not appear groggy or disoriented. Skero ordered him to unlock the door. Skero took Watkins back to the store for identification.

C.H. refused to go to the hospital but received treatment from EMS. Pictures were taken of C.H. after EMS had treated her. When Skero arrived back at the store with Watkins, C.H. was still "hysterical[.]" C.H. immediately approached the patrol car, identified Watkins as her assailant, and began "having choice words about . . . kicking her in the face over 25 cents." She did not want Skero to take Watkins to jail. Skero testified this is common in domestic violence situations because the victim is afraid of retaliation. Skero arrested Watkins and transported him to the Montgomery County Jail. Skero did not observe any injuries to Watkins, Watkins did not complain of any injuries, and the Medical Department at the jail did not require Watkins to receive any treatment.

Skero testified C.H. referred to Watkins as her husband. Skero had seen C.H. once or twice prior to the assault and knew she was homeless. Skero explained that it was his understanding that Watkins and C.H. were common-law married and that they had been together for at least two years. Skero believed that the couple lived together in the car located outside the residence where the assault occurred.

EVIDENCE OF PRIOR ASSAULTS

C.H. testified to two prior assaults by Watkins. She stated that Watkins assaulted her in May 2006. They were living together in a trailer in Willis. She testified she said something to him and he became angry. He slapped her and hit her with a broom handle hard enough to break the handle. She went to the Kroger store and called 9-1-1. Officer Craig Geffert responded to the call and located Watkins within walking distance of the store. Watkins was arrested and taken to jail. Based on Watkins's relationship with C.H., the charge against Watkins for the 2006 incident included a family violence allegation.

C.H. testified that Watkins also assaulted her in March 2008. They were arguing and she found a bat to defend herself. Watkins hit her in the head at least once and took the bat away from her. C.H. went to a neighbor's home because of her blurred vision. The neighbor called 9-1-1.

Officer Julian Trevathan responded to the call. C.H. was screaming and crying hysterically. C.H. told Trevathan that she had been punched in the head andthat she had lost her vision. Trevathan felt several large lumps on C.H.'s head and EMS transported C.H. to the hospital where she was admitted.

Trevathan found Watkins laying face down on a mattress in the house. Trevathan thought Watkins was pretending to sleep. A baseball bat was located in the corner of the room. The bat had a sticky substance on the hand grip and Trevathan noticed the same substance on Watkins when Trevathan handcuffed him. Trevathan did not notice the substance on C.H.'s hands. Watkins did not complain of any injuries or appear injured. C.H. told Trevathan that she loved Watkins and did not want him to go to jail. Watkins was arrested for assault on a family member.

Mark Wright, a crime scene investigator and latent print examiner for the Montgomery County Sheriff's Office Crime Laboratory, matched Watkins's fingerprints with those on records of his prior conviction for the March 2008 assault family violence charge to which Watkins had pleaded guilty.[]

Watkins v. State, No. 09-10-00073-CR, 2011 WL 3925583 (Tex. App. — Beaumont Aug. 24, 2011) (unpublished) (footnote omitted). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused Watkins's petition for discretionary review, making his conviction for assault on a family member final.

Watkins filed a state-court application for a writ of habeas corpus under Article 11.07 of...