Opinion
No. C98-2101.
February 2, 2000.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter comes before the court pursuant to petitioner's June 4, 1999, petition for habeas corpus relief. On January 28, 2000, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge for the issuance of a report and recommendation. It is recommended that the petition be denied.
Procedural Background
On January 8, 1990, petitioner Brian Anthony Crowley Sr. was charged with first-degree murder in violation of § 707.2(2) of the Iowa Code. Specifically, Crowley was charged with the December 29, 1989, stabbing death of Phillip Dahlgren while participating in the forcible felony of robbery in the first degree. The bench trial before the Honorable Robert E. Mahan in Black Hawk County commenced June 24, 1991. Crowley was convicted July 23, 1991, and sentenced to life in prison on August 19, 1991. The Iowa Appeals Court affirmed the decision on January 25, 1994, and the Iowa Supreme Court denied any further review on April 11, 1994. After unsuccessful post-conviction appeals, this habeas petition was filed in a timely manner September 24, 1998.
Factual Background
The victim, Phillip Dahlgren, managed the Waterloo apartment complex on Johnson Street where he lived with his roommate, Bruce Ward, who owned the complex. The petitioner was a tenant in the complex, and he lived in Apt. 4 with Keisha Morris. On Thursday, December 28, 1989, Crowley asked Ward to borrow seven dollars. Crowley said he needed money to pick up Morris whose car had broken down between Iowa City and Cedar Rapids. That night, Ward told Crowley he did not have any money.
The next day, Ward, as a service to his tenants, got $1,000 in cash from the bank so he would be able to cash tenants' ADC checks. On the evening of December 29, 1989, the petitioner made five visits to the Ward-Dahlgren apartment. At 6:45 p.m., Crowley asked Ward to borrow $17, ten dollars more than the prior evening, explaining he needed extra money for gas and food because his cousin was picking up Morris. Ward testified at trial that the petitioner was not intoxicated, that he was "calm, cool and collected," and that he gave $17 to Crowley. Approximately 10 minutes later, the petitioner returned and asked to borrow an additional $30, explaining that he needed to pick up Morris' car which had been repaired. Ward loaned the petitioner $20. Ward testified that the petitioner's demeanor was "exactly the same as it had been 10 minutes earlier, polite, kind, no hurry, no nervousness, nothing out of the usual."
At 7:45 p.m., petitioner again asked to borrow money. He said he needed $50 because he sold his bed to a man for $50 and the man only had a hundred-dollar bill. Ward again loaned the petitioner money. Five minutes later, the petitioner returned to Ward's apartment and told Ward he had been mugged by four men he did not recognize. Petitioner offered to sign a promissory note or leave a VCR tape as collateral, but Ward declined the petitioner's offer and gave him another $50. Before the petitioner left the apartment, Ward testified, the petitioner added up "fast and accurately" the $87 he owed.
Then, Ward rode his exercise bicycle after he removed his pants which contained a money clip with about $60, and a roll of dollar bills totaling $450, three credit cards, his driver's license and a picture of his family. At 9:50 p.m., Dahlgren returned home and Ward told him about lending money to the petitioner. Ward admitted to Dahlgren that he felt "stupid." A short time later, the petitioner came to the Ward-Dahlgren apartment, saying he would wait there for Morris to return, so he could repay the loan. Ward told the petitioner that he had just been discussing the robbery with Dahlgren. Ward suggested that the petitioner call the police, but stopped Crowley from following through since he could not identify his alleged robbers.
While Dahlgren was in the bedroom, Ward talked with Crowley. Ward was about the put his pants back on when the petitioner put his left hand behind his back, stood up and pulled out a knife, saying, `You've had it now." Petitioner cut Ward's groin and left leg. As Ward ran toward the kitchen in an effort to escape, Dahlgen exited the bedroom to see what all the commotion was about. Ward heard Dahlgren yell, "Help, I've been stabbed." Ward went back to the living room, and the petitioner was gone. Ward's pants with the money inside the pockets were gone, too. Dahlgren fell to his knees and said, "Why did Brian stab me?" Ward called 911, and both men were transported to the hospital. Dahlgren died as a result of his wound. At trial, Ward testified that during the fifth, and final visit to his apartment, the petitioner's demeanor was "exactly the same as earlier, very calm, cool, and collected; not sweating, not nervous, not fidgety." Also, he said the petitioner had no trouble communicating.
While Dahlgren lay on the living room floor, neighbor Janet Peterson came to his aid. Dahlgren identified the petitioner by saying, "the guy in No. 4 in the middle building did it." Damien McMullen, 14 years old in 1989, testified that at 11 p.m. on December 29, 1989, the petitioner game him a bloody five-dollar bill, told him he had been in a fight, and asked him to pick up petitioner's son. Keisha Morris testified that she had moved out of the Johnson Street apartment because she and the petitioner were not getting along. Also, she said the petitioner had called that night about their son. Between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m., the petitioner went to the home of his ex-girlfriend, Vivian Groves, and told her he had been "fighting with a white guy at work." He stayed a short time.
Debra Matlock lived with her boyfriend James Smith in an apartment near the Johnson Street complex. Matlock testified that the petitioner seemed "normal" and did not appear to be on drugs when he got into their car that night. His hand was bloody and wrapped in a kitchen towel, and petitioner told Matlock he had "just beat the hell out of [his] old lady." Matlock said the petitioner did not seem to react to the police cars and ambulance they saw headed toward Johnson Street. When the petitioner paid for gasoline, Matlock noticed that there was blood on the money.
The trio then went to a pool hall where petitioner gave Smith $50 to buy crack. After they smoked the crack, the petitioner again paid for more drugs. At 1 p.m. on December 30, 1989, the petitioner was dropped off at the Logandale Apartments where Groves lived. Groves believed the petitioner, the father of her two children, was high on drugs. The petitioner was arrested at her apartment. The murder weapon was found in a dumpster at the Johnson Street Apartments, along with Ward's driver's license, credit cards and his empty money clip.
Analysis Insufficiency of the Evidence
The petitioner claims that the state did not present sufficient evidence at his trial for a rational trier-of-fact to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for the charge of first-degree murder.
Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1)-(2) (Supp. 1999) which went into effect April 24, 1996, the court is restrained from granting a habeas petition unless the adjudication "resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as described by the Supreme Court of the United States," or "resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in the light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding." See Thiel v. Schuetzle, ___ F.3d ___, 1999 WL 1240433 (8th Cir. Dec. 21, 1999) (finding the district court gave "little or no weight" to witness Hunter's testimony and held that even if Hunter lied on the stand, there was not a reasonable likelihood that it affected the outcome of the trial). Prior to the passage of AEDPA, the standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence in a habeas proceeding was whether, after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier-of-fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979).
The Supreme Court has recognized that "it is not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state-court determinations on state-law questions." Bounds v. Delo, 151 F.3d 1116, 1117 (8th Cir. 1998) (citing Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62 (1991)) (finding no Due Process violation because the state introduced ample evidence to convict Bounds beyond a reasonable doubt). The court applies a rigorous burden of proof under which state court factual findings are presumed to be correct unless the petitioner rebuts the presumption with clear and convincing evidence. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(d)(1),(e)(1). In Bounds, the court held that determinations of state law made by state courts are binding. See also Lingle v. Iowa, 195 F.3d 1023, 1025 (8th Cir. 1999). Instead, review is limited to deciding whether a conviction violated the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States. Bounds,supra, at 1118.
In this case, the trial court made the factual determination that the defendant was able to form the "specific intent" to commit first-degree murder. On appeal, the Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed. The trial judge heard from two opposing experts on whether the defendant was in a delusional or paranoid state when the crime was committed. Dr. Michael Taylor, a respected psychiatrist, testified for the state that he found no evidence to show the defendant experienced delusions or paranoia on December 29, 1989. A summary of his testimony can be found at pages 684 to 687 of the trial transcript. That testimony was obviously thoughtful and thorough, given after a full review of available factual data and an interview of the defendant. Dr. Franklin Gawin, an expert in cocaine abuse and dependency, testified that the defendant was suffering from a brief, cocaine-induced psychosis ("stoned out of his mind") at the time he stabbed Ward and Dahlgren. Also, Dr. Gawin testified that stealing Ward's pants was an afterthought and there was no relation between the theft and the stabbing. The trial court judge accepted Dr. Taylor's testimony.
Dr. Taylor's testimony was supported by other witnesses. Victim Bruce Ward testified that the defendant acted rationally during his first four visits to the victims' apartment on the night of the stabbing when he borrowed $87, and that he offered explanations about why he needed the money. Debra Matlock testified that the defendant acted "normal" when she and her boyfriend drove with the defendant to buy drugs.
Conclusion
The petitioner's Due Process rights were not violated by the state courts. The state presented sufficient evidence to support the petitioner's conviction of first-degree murder. The believability of witnesses, especially as between two well-qualified experts, is a fact determination of the state court that is binding on this court and does not present any substantial federal constitutional issue. It is recommended that the petitioner's request for habeas relief be denied.
Upon the foregoing,
IT IS RECOMMENDED that, unless any party files objections to the Report and Recommendation in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) within ten (10) days of the service of a copy of this report and recommendation, the petition for habeas corpus relief be denied.
Objections must specify the parts of the report and recommendation to which objections are made. Objections also must specify the parts of the record, including exhibits and transcript lines, which form the basis for such objections. See Fed.R.Civ.P . 72. Failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); Thompson v. Nix, 897 F.2d 356 (8th Cir. 1990).