Jones v. Smith
1:16-cv-06470
E.D.N.YJun 17, 2019Background
- In 1994 Robert Jones was convicted by a Queens jury of second-degree murder and weapons offenses for the fatal shooting of Antoine Stone; he was sentenced to 25 years to life. Appellate Division affirmed in 1999.
- At trial three bystanders (Joan Purser, Philip Englebert, Josue Rodriguez) identified a man on a bicycle as the shooter; Purser and Englebert identified Jones in a lineup and at trial; Englebert also identified a bicycle recovered from Jones’s apartment.
- In 2013 Jones moved to vacate his conviction under CPL 440, presenting recantation affidavits and testimony from Purser and Englebert (they recanted) and alleging Brady violations, due process/privacy-of-identification issues, ineffective assistance of counsel, and actual innocence.
- The state court held a 440 hearing, heard witnesses for both sides (including detectives and prosecutors who denied misconduct), found the recantations not credible, denied the 440 motion in a detailed opinion, and rejected Brady, due process, ineffective assistance, and actual innocence claims.
- Jones sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asserting that the state court unreasonably applied federal law and made unreasonable factual determinations about credibility, Brady materiality (including evidence linking the River a murder), counsel’s investigation (ballistics and a narcotics notebook), and actual innocence.
- The district court deferred to the state court’s credibility findings, rejected all federal claims (Brady, due process, Strickland, and actual innocence), and denied the petition and a certificate of appealability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brady: prosecution withheld prior inconsistent statements of Purser/Englebert | Jones: police/prosecutors failed to disclose prior inconsistent statements that would impeach identifications | State: recantations not credible so no undisclosed Brady material existed; nothing favorable suppressed | Denied — court defers to state court credibility findings; no Brady violation established |
| Brady: nondisclosure of Rivera-murder link (ballistics/timing) | Jones: shell-casing match and spatiotemporal proximity connected alternative perpetrator (Rivera) to Stone murder | State: proximity/ballistics do not favor Jones; could implicate Jones for both murders; not exculpatory or material | Denied — evidence not sufficiently favorable or material under Brady |
| Due process: suggestive IDs and use of false testimony | Jones: identifications were suggestive/tainted and the State used false testimony, violating due process | State: identifications and testimony were credible; recantations unreliable | Denied — court follows state credibility determinations; no due process violation |
| Ineffective assistance (Strickland): failure to investigate ballistics/notebook | Jones: trial counsel Turner failed to pursue ballistics link and locate narcotics notebook, prejudicing defense | State: even if deficient, Jones cannot show reasonable probability of different outcome—no evidence an alternative perpetrator existed or that notebook would help | Denied — no prejudice shown; Strickland claim fails |
| Actual innocence (freestanding or gateway) | Jones: recantations and withheld evidence make it more likely than not no reasonable juror would convict | State: recantations not credible; new evidence not persuasive | Denied — petitioner fails to show it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would convict |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution’s suppression of favorable evidence violates due process)
- Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (1999) (Brady three-part framework and materiality standard)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (ineffective assistance requires deficient performance and prejudice)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (deference to state-court application of Strickland on habeas review)
- McQuiggin v. Perkins, 569 U.S. 383 (2013) (actual innocence can overcome procedural bars; standard for gateway claims)
- Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998) (actual innocence standard quoted with Schlup)
- Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995) ("more likely than not" standard for actual innocence gateway)
- Fernandez v. Capra, 916 F.3d 215 (2d Cir. 2019) (recantation credibility and related habeas principles)
- Miller v. Angliker, 848 F.2d 1312 (2d Cir. 1988) (definition of Brady materiality)