Young v. Director

• Decision Date: 27 February 2015
• Docket Number: CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:12cv38
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas
• Parties: JOHN ANTHONY YOUNG, #1527987 v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

JOHN ANTHONY YOUNG, #1527987 v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:12cv38

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION

February 27, 2015

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner James Anthony Young, a prisoner confined at the Stiles Unit in Beaumont, Texas, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled and numbered petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States Magistrate Judge.

Background

Petitioner was charged with two counts of aggravated kidnapping, enhanced by two prior felony convictions. A jury found both enhancement paragraphs to be true and found him guilty on both counts of aggravated kidnapping. On August 22, 2008, the jury sentenced him to fifty-five years' confinement for each count, to be served concurrently. On December 17, 2009, the Second Court of Appeals affirmed Petitioner's conviction. Young v. State, No. 02-08-00312-CR (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 2009, pet. ref'd). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA) refused hispetitioner for discretionary review on September 15, 2010. Young v. State, PDR No. 0075-10. The CCA then denied his state writ of habeas corpus on September 28, 2011, without written order, based on the findings of the trial court without a hearing. Ex parte Young, Application No. 76,390-01.

In his § 2254 petition, Petitioner asserts he is entitled relief because:

1. He was denied effective assistance of counsel when counsel failed to:

a. request a jury instruction on safe release; and

b. object to the jury instruction on enhancement paragraphs because the order of prior convictions was improper; and

2. There was insufficient evidence to support the convictions.

The Government filed a Response, asserting that Petitioner's issues are without merit, to which Petitioner filed a Reply.

Statement of Facts

The Second Court of Appeals included an in-depth recitation of the facts of this case:

Carlton Adger testified that on the night of February 22, 2006, he and his girlfriend, Sharice Brodie, were driving northbound on I-35 on their way to Denton. Carlton was sleeping. Sharice woke him because two cars driving next to them looked as if they were about to wreck. One of the cars, a Suburban, was going fast and swerving; it collided with a Honda next to it and ran up against the median.¹ Carlton identified photographs of the Suburban offered by the State. Carlton had Sharice pull over so that they could check and see if anyone in the Suburban had been injured.

Sharice stayed in the car while Carlton started walking toward the Suburban. At that point, Carlton saw someone he later identified as appellant "come from around the [S]uburban and jog, then . . . slow[] down like a fast walk, . . . and approach[]" him. Carlton said appellant was in a big hurry, as if he were trying to get away from the scene. Appellant seemed to be in a state of shock, and he told Carlton to "[g]et back in the car."² As appellant said this, he was holding his hand up and had something covering it; he waved his hand as if he had a gun. Carlton could tell "it wasn't his finger because it was something that stopped short in [a] towel or a shirt or something . . . and made it seem as if he had a weapon." The towel was stiff, stuck out, and didn't move. Carlton believed appellant had a gun, but he did not actually see a gun.

After Carlton realized that appellant had what he thought was a gun, Carlton became afraid. If appellant had concealed a gun under the towel, the barrel would have been pointing at Carlton. Carlton got back in the passenger side front seat, and appellant got into the passenger side back seat. Carlton told Sharice to drive, and they drove for about five to seven minutes. She drove to the La Quinta in Lewisville, off Corporate Drive. Carlton had suggested to appellant that they could let him out there just to get him out of the car. Appellant said, "[F]ine. Okay."³ Then he darted out of the car and said thank you. According to Carlton, appellant "pretty much was trying to, basically, get away."

As they drove, appellant kept saying, "[M]y partner is going to be mad at me, I done wrecked his car." Appellant smelled strongly of alcohol. Carlton realized, based on appellant's level of agitation, that he must have done something else wrong other than a hit and run. It made him scared.

Carlton identified State's exhibits 4 and 5 as the sports jersey and black pants appellant was wearing that night.

Sharice testified that around 11:00 on February 22, 2006, she was driving on I-35 near the intersection with the George Bush turnpike in Carrollton, when she saw an SUV behind her car; it came up on her car fast, swerved into the next lane, and hit the car in front of her. She identified the Suburban shown in State's exhibits thirty-three through thirty-five as the SUV. Sharice said that when the cars collided, the Suburban went to the left and the car went to the right. She pulled over to the left-side shoulder of the highway.

When Carlton got out of the car,⁴ Sharice saw him walking toward the back; she could hear him asking the SUV driver if he was okay. She did not see anything unusual until Carlton got into the car, followed by appellant. Appellant had his hand wrapped in "a towel or some kind of shirt" and he was carrying a Crown Royal bag. She could not say what was underneath, but she thought appellant had a gun and she was scared.

According to Sharice, appellant asked her and Carlton to hurry up and drop him off at La Quinta because he had a friend that lived in an apartment in the area.⁵ He seemed nervous because he had wrecked the Suburban, which he had borrowed from a friend. He said he should not have fallen asleep at the wheel. He seemed to be in a hurry and smelled of liquor. It took about five to seven minutes for them to get to the La Quinta.

According to Sharice, the parking lot at the La Quinta was dark and no one was around; she was afraid because it was late and she was pregnant at the time.⁶ She said although there was light shining on the hotel itself, there was not any in the parking lot where they were parked. When appellant got out, he was polite and hurried up and around the side of the building.

Gary Fernandez, a detective with the City of Carrollton police, investigated the offense against Carlton and Sharice. He obtained and executed a search warrant for the Suburban. He found evidence linking appellant to a robbery that had occurred at a Sonic in nearby Coppell immediately before the accident; specifically, he found a cell phone under the driver's seat that the robber had taken from the cook at the Sonic.⁷ According to Detective Fernandez, there was no fingerprint evidence; he did not know if that was because the Suburban had not been dusted for fingerprints or if no prints were found. Detective Fernandez also confirmed that if Sharice had driven from the wreck to Lewisville, she would have crossed the county line from Dallas to Denton County.

Detective Scott Peters, a Coppell police officer, testified that he investigated the Sonic robbery and participated in the investigation of the offense against Carlton and Sharice. He obtained a search warrant for appellant's residence and also was present when police searched appellant's Mitsubishi. Lewisville, Carrollton, and Coppell police all worked together in handling the investigation. Detective Peters identified State's exhibits thirty-eight through forty-three as photographs of the Mitsubishi and items found in it: among them, a towel and a shoe box with a black bag containing money inside.

Detective Peters identified State's exhibit forty-four as a shoebox found in appellant's apartment; a BB gun was found inside. According to Detective Peters, the BB gun was similar to a .45 or 9 millimeter semiautomatic weapon in size, shape, and color. He testified that such a weapon is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury, depending on where the person was shot.

Detective Peters also testified that the jersey, pants, stocking cap, and hat police found in appellant's apartment matched those worn by the man in the surveillance video from the Sonic.

Detective Robert Feagins, a police officer for the City of Lewisville, testified that on February 22, 2006, he learned of a robbery at a Sonic in Coppell⁸ with a gold Suburban involved. Based on the information he received, he went to a location in Lewisville where he met with the vehicle owner, Roosevelt Sanders, who admitted to having driven the Suburban that day.

Detective Feagins also spoke with Carollton police officers, who were talking to Carlton and Sharice; he had the officers and Carlton and Sharice come to a parking lot outside Sanders's workplace to see if Carlton and Sharice could identify Sanders as the person who had been driving the Suburban. They said he was not the same man. Detective Feagins then showed them "photo lineups [he] happened to have with [him] of an additional suspect."⁹ He spread these photo arrays out on the trunk. One of the photographs was of appellant; Carlton and Sharice identified him as the driver of the Suburban.¹⁰ This identification occurred approximately thirty minutes after the wreck.

Carlton and Sharice told Detective Feagins that they had been driving northbound on l-35 and that they had stopped for a wreck in front of them to see if anyone needed assistance. Appellant approached them with a towel over his hand as if he were trying to hide something under it and demanded that they give him a ride to Lewisville. Because they thought he had a handgun under the towel, and therefore felt threatened, they drove him to the La Quinta on I-35 in Lewisville, which was probably two miles away from

...