Opinion for Pedro Gutierrez v. Michael McGinnis Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility, 389 F.3d 300 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to … No such wrongs occurred here. However, the third statement, the statement made to Assistant District Attorney DiBenedetto, was received. 49 L.Ed.2d 466. We granted certiorari to consider the important questions of federal constitutional law in relation to federal habeas proceedings raised by these decisions. Moreover, while at the stationhouse, Alexander was advised that he had a right to make a phone call. Q. Respondent's original motion to vacate his conviction was based on the fact that a juror in respondent's case, one John Dana Smith, submitted during the trial an application for employment as a major felony investigator in the District Attorney's Office.3 Smith had learned of the position from a friend who had contacts within the office and who had inquired on Smith's behalf without mentioning Smith's name or the fact that he was a juror in respondent's trial. Did you get any money out of the deal? After further probing the officer's knowledge concerning the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime, Alexander further stated, in substance, according to Detective Cambridge, that "(t)wo of Gene's regular partners had to go south for a funeral, and Gene said to me and the little guy we didn't have to do anything, one of us would stand by the door and the other would take the registers. Each time he was so asked, Alexander nodded his head in the affirmative. it must be established not merely that the [State's action] is undesirable, erroneous, or even 'universally condemned,' but that it violated some right which was guaranteed to the defendant by the Fourteenth Amendment. I got a cart, and I walked around the store a couple of times. A. He was right behind me. Do you know what kind or what caliber? Five days later, after an investigation to verify the information, he informed the trial court and defense counsel of the application and the fact that its existence was known to attorneys in his office at some time before the conclusion of the trial. 682; Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510, 47 S.Ct. ANDREW M. CUOMO AARON M. BALDWIN, ESQ. Exclusion is impermissible, not simply because jurors who are not members of the defendant's class may be prejudiced against the defendant, but also because the jury would be deprived of "a perspective on human events that may have unsuspected importance in any case that may be presented." 450, 98 L.Ed. The New York Court of Appeals denied leave to appeal. 917 (1941). It also receives felons 16 years of age and older by transfer from the Elmira Reception Center or other institutions. 22 § 660 (1971); Ore.Rev.Stat. Gen. (Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. 39 N.Y.2d 949, 352 N.E.2d 894, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1039 (1976). And in contrast to the facts in Escobedo at no time from Alexander's arrival at the stationhouse until his confession to DiBenedetto later that evening did any attorney appear at the stationhouse or call the stationhouse requesting to speak to Alexander; Alexander, while in detention, was repeatedly and carefully warned of his constitutional right to counsel and, most significantly, at no time before or during his various discussions with the police officers or the prosecutor at the stationhouse did he, despite his undeniable familiarity with his right to counsel, protest that he wished to consult with an attorney. In the exceptional situations that may require application of an "implied bias" doctrine, the lower federal courts need not be deterred by 28 U.S.C. The petitioner emphasizes that during the evidentiary hearing, the trial judge had an opportunity to observe the juror's demeanor. She said, "Hurry up and come out of there, because the kids want to look at the T.V." In re Oliver, 333 U.S. 257, 68 S.Ct. A majority of this Court now reverses, holding that the post-trial evidentiary hearing provided sufficient protection to respondent's right to an impartial jury. We disagree. Again, a comparison of the circumstances there with those here is instructive and shows that in no way are the two situations comparable. He told me when I got in the Supermarket he said, "He told me like I was shopping get a cart like I was shopping." On the second day of trial Justice Mollen reversed his earlier determination, made at the Huntley hearing, and ruled that the first statement Alexander had made to the police in the locker room on the morning of the 8th of September would be excluded inasmuch as Alexander's "nodding" after each question posed to him by Detective Schneider might not have been an adequate enough indication of an intention to waive his Miranda rights.5 The second statement, that which was made to Detective Cambridge immediately following the initial statement to Detective Schneider, was not introduced by the prosecution during its case-in-chief, and the state trial judge refused to allow the statement to be introduced at the end of the government's case inasmuch as Justice Mollen found that Alexander could not, at that point anyway, have conducted an effective cross-examination. 320, 330 N.E.2d 743 (1975) (juror whose relative is a member of the prosecutor's staff should be disqualified). We discuss these claims seriatim. A. A. He wanted me to stand up to the door, and don't let nobody out of the store. . Id., at 229, 74 S.Ct., at 451. .". At a hearing on the motion before the same judge who had presided at the trial, the motion was denied, the judge finding "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the events giving rise to the motion did not influence the verdict. Wigmore, Evidence § 1766, at 250 (Chadbourn rev. Thus, respondent argues, not only was the prosecutors' action itself a denial of due process, but it also prevented respondent from availing himself of the process available under New York law for correcting juror bias. 339 U.S., at 167, 70 S.Ct., at 521. I do know I was in Bohack Supermarket. The trial judge stated that the failure to inform the court and defense counsel of Smith's application was "a serious error in judgment," People v. Phillips, 87 Misc.2d 613, 628, 384 N.Y.S.2d 906, 916 (1975), and "unique misjudgment," id., at 631, 384 N.Y.S.2d, at 918. § 1074 (West Supp.1981); Idaho Code § 19-2020 (1979); Minn.Rule Crim.Proc. See Donnelly v. DeChristoforo, 416 U.S. 637, 642, 94 S.Ct. A. Such determinations may properly be made at a hearing like that ordered in Remmer and held in this case.7 The District Court and the Court of Appeals disregarded this doctrine: they held that a post-trial hearing comporting with our decisions in Remmer and other cases prosecuted in the federal courts was constitutionally insufficient in a state court under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Q. A. See also Frazier v. United States, 335 U.S. 497, 69 S.Ct. 177, 81 L.Ed. As will be seen in Part III of this opinion, the Court of Appeals misread Agurs. Thus, under the circumstances, respondent was prejudiced by the prosecutors' misconduct. 2791, 2804-06, 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1976); Estes v. Texas, supra. Gen. of the State of New York, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Asst. Bob Smith, Robert Smith? A group of protesters broke the roll call line to go back to their own cells in … CourtListener is sponsored by the non-profit Free Law Project. See, e.g., State v. West, 157 W.Va. 209, 210, 200 S.E.2d 859, 861 (1973) (reversible error where trial court denies challenge for cause to juror who is employee of prosecutorial agency); State v. Kokoszka, 123 Conn. 161, 163, 193 A. In connection with his argument that due process was denied by the prosecutors' withholding of Smith's application, respondent notes that had the prosecutors disclosed the application, the trial court could have replaced Smith with an alternate juror. A. I went to the door, and this kid Bobby I don't know what he said. Rejecting the claim, the Appellate Division expressly ruled that DiBenedetto's nonresponsive answer had not been coercive or deceptive and the court therefore concluded that the answer did not impact upon what was otherwise a clear waiver of Alexander's right to counsel. Visitors Learn more about how to ensure an enjoyable and memorable visit. 96 S.Ct. I made some excuse up to her, and she said, "Okay". Thomas Camerlengo, seen in this 2016 photo, was sentenced to 50 years to life behind bars which he is serving in Attica Correctional Facility. 177, 81 L.Ed. See Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154, 92 S.Ct. Superintendent Mailing Address Attica Correctional Facility Exchange Street Attica, NY 14011-0149 Clinton Correctional Facility Route 374, Cook Street P.O. To be sure, Alexander testified that he had been physically abused by the police officers while being held at the stationhouse, but Justice Mollen specifically found that Alexander, whom the judge diagnosed as being afflicted with " selective amnesia," was not a credible witness. 14,692g) (CC Va.1807), Chief Justice Marshall indicated that he believed implied-bias rules were appropriate in some circumstances. See, e.g., Cal.Penal Code Ann. A. Gene swung at the guy with the gun. And the second shot I didn't know whether he shot to scare the people in the store. Superintendent William Kirwan: Strength; Approximately 1,000 inmates: Casualties and losses; 33 prisoners killed: 10 correctional officers killed: The Attica Prison riot, also known as the Attica Prison rebellion or Attica Prison uprising, occurred at the Attica Correctional Facility in Attica, New York, United States, in 1971. As I have already explained, I do not believe that it was possible for the state court to determine, on the basis of an evidentiary hearing, whether Smith was biased. In Haak v. State, Ind., 417 N.E.2d 321 (1981), the Indiana Supreme Court held that a woman whose husband was offered a position on the prosecutor's staff on the day that she was selected as a juror in a rape case was impliedly biased. 350 (Mun.Ct.1935) (conviction set aside where juror's son applied to defendant for a job). 2543. 632 F.2d 1019 (1980). In short, if the prosecutors had not withheld the information about Smith's job application, it is quite likely that Smith would have been excused and replaced with an alternate. . The award, presented by Genesee Valley BOCES, recognizes Conway’s involvement with the Legal Careers Academies, which are partnership programs between Genesee Community College’s College Tech Prep program and Genesee Valley BOCES. Q. Q. 734 (1950), the Court rejected a claim that a juror's employment with the Federal Government was a ground to find implied bias, but did not foreclose a finding of implied bias in more serious situations. Adoption of a conclusive presumption of bias in these limited circumstances would not be without precedent; such presumptions of juror bias have ancient historical roots. Alexander then asked, "You said that if I wanted an attorney present, that's my right to have an attorney present (?)" On the basis of the findings made by the state trial court judge and also on the basis of the record of the suppression hearing in the state trial court, it would be difficult to reach any other conclusion. Q. He said, "Open the safe, you know After the kid emptied the register, I went over and said to Gene, "Let's go.". After trial, he would have to admit that he had been unable to obey his oath as a juror, and that he had been unfair in evaluating the evidence. 407 U.S., at 504, 92 S.Ct., at 2169 (MARSHALL, J., joined by Douglas and Stewart, JJ.). Such a requirement blinks reality. Ibid. However, these cases do not hold that an implied-bias rule would never be appropriate. This Court reversed, holding that prospective jurors who have sat in the courtroom and heard a verdict returned against an individual immediately prior to that individual's trial on a similar charge should be automatically disqualified.19. The state court conducted a post-trial evidentiary hearing and determined that the juror was not actually biased. Respondent subsequently filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming that he was denied his constitutional right to an impartial jury. I don't know whether he hit him across the head or what. It is relevant to note that if a judge had an application pending with a litigant while he was trying a case, he would be presumed biased, no matter how vigorously he protested that he was actually impartial. I don't give a damn who it was it could have been my brother, my friend or anybody. This finding of fact is, of course, entitled to a presumption of correctness, 28 U.S.C. Cf. What did you have to do? Did you have a gun at the time? The state trial court judge, as was his right to do as the assessor of credibility, chose to believe the officers' version. 654. Attica Correctional Facility, a maximum-security prison in western New York, is up to 101 cases, passing Cayuga and tying Shawangunk for the fifth-highest total in the DOCCS system. 1345, 67 L.Ed.2d 332 (1981). Upon returning to the detention pen, while walking through the police locker room, Alexander indicated that he wished to discuss his situation with the officer. My wife I thought my wife was at work. Assigned counsel has done an admirable job briefing and arguing this appeal but, inasmuch as we find no error in Judge Curtin's decision or reasoning, we affirm. In a class suit brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1972) × It was in front of the store. I asked him, "What type of money, and what type of game?" The Court did not require a particularized showing that the confession actually prejudiced the jurors against the defendant. I could have stayed out on the street. Do you know what time of day this was? And? 802, 66 L.Ed.2d 740 (1981), which held that the appropriate safeguard against the possibility that news coverage of a defendant's trial influenced the jurors is the defendant's opportunity to show that the coverage compromised the ability of the jury to adjudicate fairly. Brief for Respondent 7. Q. Q. In response to close inquiry by defense counsel, Smith declared his belief that he could be a fair and impartial juror in the case. After an independent review of the transcript of the Huntley hearing, the trial transcript, the briefs and other records of trial and appeal, United States District Judge John T. Curtin, in a decision dated November 4, 1977, concurred in the state trial court's findings. That hurt the hell out of me. § 2254(d); Accord, Tanner v. Vincent, 541 F.2d 932, 937 (2d Cir. It is, moreover, evident from the record that Alexander understood that he had a right to consult with an attorney and that he voluntarily relinquished that right. I've given further thought and consideration to those rulings. Specifically, Escobedo had already retained an attorney prior to his interrogation at the stationhouse. 1639, 1641-1642, 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961).1 "[O]ur common-law heritage, our Constitution, and our experience in applying that Constitution have committed us irrevocably to the position that the criminal trial has one well-defined purpose—to provide a fair and reliable determination of guilt." 215-218. Q. 450, 98 L.Ed. A. Case opinion for US 3rd Circuit Hai Kim Nguyen, Appellant v. Attorney General of New Jersey; Superintendent Attica Correctional Facility.. Read the Court's full decision on FindLaw. Appellants are inmates of the Attica Correctional Facility who have been segregated from the general inmate population of that prison in a special housing unit known as "A Block, 6 Company." Decided June 25, 1976. Gene's was." Alexander thereupon exclaimed: "My gun wasn't popping. Such an agreement was reached with respect to juror Bethel. On the one hand, if the claim that there was a fatal taint constitutes a separate and distinct claim (apart from the more general claim that his confession was involuntary) upon which an explicit finding should have been made in order for the state trial court's determination to be entitled to the statutorily prescribed presumption of correctness, then Alexander may not present this issue to us because it was not presented as a distinct claim in either the state courts or in the federal district court below. In particular, the state trial judge found that before each of his confessions on the 8th of September, Alexander had been carefully and fully apprised that he had a right to talk to a lawyer, to have a lawyer present during the police interrogation and to have a lawyer appointed to represent him if he could not afford a lawyer. [*] Certain individual employees of the New York State Department of Correctional Services ("DOCS") have cross-moved to intervene in this action for the limited purpose of opposing disclosure of the testimony which they gave before the Grand Jury. Id., at 1371-1372. Measured against this standard, many state rules would not be constitutionally required. Q. There, we held that a prosecutor must disclose unrequested evidence which would create a reasonable doubt of guilt that did not otherwise exist. 261, 91 L.Ed. She works at Kings County. 734 (1950). He asked a friend, Criminal Court Officer Rudolph Fontaine, to determine the proper method of applying for employment. Section 330.30 provides in pertinent part: "At any time after rendition of a verdict of guilty and before sentence, the court may, upon motion of the defendant, set aside or modify the verdict or any part thereof upon the following grounds: * * * * *, "2. A. Name : In addition, after the application had been filed, he met regularly with Fontaine and Jury Warden Mario Piazza in order to determine the progress of his application. Specifically, where a juror pursues employment with the office of the prosecutor, under circumstances highly suggestive of misconduct or conflict of interest, bias should be "implied," and he should be automatically disqualified, despite the absence of proof of actual bias. 87 Misc.2d, at 618-619, 384 N.Y.S.2d, at 910. Q. He argued that the jury which convicted him, composed primarily of employees of the United States Government, was inherently biased because such employees were subject to Executive Order No. 1976). 12) during the course of the day, The Court: Now, before we proceed with the opening statements, so there's no misunderstanding, I'm going to make a ruling at this time. Is that Edward Williams? August 7th, 1978, Precedential Status: Law (McKinney 1971) (CPL),1 and a hearing on his motion was held pursuant to CPL § 330.40.2 The hearing was held before the justice who presided at respondent's trial, and the motion to vacate was denied by him in an opinion concluding "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the events giving rise to the motion did not influence the verdict. Respondent may, of course, defend the judgment below on any ground which the law and the record permit, provided the asserted ground would not expand the relief which has been granted. Do you know Gene's last name? Computed Name Heading. A. Gene told Bobby he said, "When I tell you to open the register," and he said, "Sam, you go to the door," and he said, "I'll lock the manager up assistant manager." The Detective told me his last name when I was here. . In concluding that an implied-bias rule is not appropriate, and that a post-trial evidentiary hearing is an adequate remedy, the majority relies heavily on this Court's decision in Remmer v. United States, 347 U.S. 227, 74 S.Ct. Q. The prosecutors' misconduct in this case deprived respondent of a hearing during trial, and of the opportunity to substitute an alternate juror. Do you know where Gene hangs out or lives? One of the demands of the prisoners is the removal of Mancusi. This materiality requirement implicitly recognizes that the misconduct's effect on the trial, not the blameworthiness of the prosecutor, is the crucial inquiry for due process purposes. See note 1 Supra. At about 10:30 a. m. one of the arresting officers, a Detective Schneider, took Alexander to a bathroom. “I’m a prison brat,” he said. I saw the guy holding his head. Introduction Pro se petitioner William J. Ernest L. Montanye, Former Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility, Et Al., Petitioners, V. Rodney R. Haymes. . Despite the majority's suggestions to the contrary, juror Smith was not a passive, indifferent job applicant.5 He began pursuing employment as an investigator in the Office of the District Attorney on September 23, 1974, the same day he was sworn in. Yes we entered the Supermarket. § 2254(d). ATTICA — Attica Correctional Facility Prison Superintendent Jim Conway has a simple way to describe himself. Respondent was prejudiced by the prosecutors' failure to disclose during the trial their knowledge that juror Smith had applied for a job with the Office of the District Attorney. Those complaints, many not dissimilar from grievances cited by inmates before the 1971 riot, have elicited promises for change from Attica's superintendent and the Department of Correctional … § 136.220 (1979); S.D. . Federal courts hold no supervisory authority over state judicial proceedings and may intervene only to correct wrongs of constitutional dimension.