Gutierrez v. Smith
702 F.3d 103
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Gutierrez fatally stabbed John Villaplana during a bar brawl and was convicted of depraved indifference murder under NY Penal Law § 125.25(2).
- Trial occurred in 2001; conviction followed a jury verdict and he received 25 years to life, with concurrent assault sentence.
- Appellate Division affirmed; leave to appeal to NY Court of Appeals was denied; Gutierrez then filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
- District court concluded the habeas claim was procedurally barred due to state contemporaneous objection rules.
- Court recognized a procedural exception—New York’s post-trial law evolution shifted the controlling standard, making the claim cognizable on habeas review and warranted merits review.
- Key NY depraved indifference law developments occurred through Register (1983), Sanchez (2002), Hafeez (2003), Gonzalez (2004), Payne (2004), Suarez (2005), and Feingold (2006).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sufficiency claim is procedurally barred | Gutierrez argues the claim was preserved for review | State court barred the claim for lack of contemporaneous objection | The claim is cognizable and reaches merits despite default |
| Whether the change in NY depraved indifference law provides cause to excuse default | Shift in law after trial provides external cause | The shift was not anticipated and does not affect default | Yes; change constitutes cause for failure to object |
| Whether substantial evidence supports depraved indifference after evolving NY law | Record supports criminal recklessness and depraved indifference | Evidence fails under stricter pre-Feingold standards | A reasonable jury could have found the requisite mens rea under current standards |
| Whether the court should certify a question of New York law | Certification not appropriate; not necessary given the record and precedents |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Hafeez, 100 N.Y.2d 253 (N.Y. 2003) (rejected depraved indifference in some one-on-one killings)
- People v. Gonzalez, 1 N.Y.3d 464 (N.Y. 2004) (one-on-one killings require careful mens rea analysis)
- People v. Payne, 3 N.Y.3d 266 (N.Y. 2004) (limits on depraved indifference in one-on-one killings; rare exceptions)
- People v. Suarez, 6 N.Y.3d 202 (N.Y. 2005) (identifies categories of one-on-one killings that may qualify)
- People v. Sanchez, 98 N.Y.2d 373 (N.Y. 2002) (reaffirmed focus on objective risk; shifted interpretive framework)
- People v. Register, 60 N.Y.2d 270 (N.Y. 1983) (pre-Feingold framework treating depraved indifference as recklessness)
- People v. Feingold, 7 N.Y.3d 288 (N.Y. 2006) (overruled Register/Sanchez to treat depraved indifference as mental state)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence in habeas corpus)