Lopez v. Miller
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7262
E.D.N.Y2013Background
- Lopez was convicted of second-degree murder in 1989 in Brooklyn; his trial relied on two witnesses, Flores and Chapman, with significant reliability issues.
- Flores testified but described a shooter who did not resemble Lopez; Flores could not identify Lopez in court.
- Chapman testified at trial through inconsistent statements and later recanted; a pretrial and post-trial record revealed a cooperation deal involving Chapman.
- Alibi witnesses Guido and Rivera swore trial counsel never interviewed them; Cafield’s letter suggested Chapman’s credibility issues and possible prosecutorial pressure.
- Diaz, a witness from the Dominican Republic, later testified via videoconference that the mug shot did not match the shooter; multiple witnesses’ reliability was questioned post-trial.
- Lopez pursued state collateral and federal habeas petitions, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel and actual innocence; the court ultimately granted habeas relief based on actual innocence and ineffective assistance, and ordered release with retrial barred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether actual innocence can excuse AEDPA's time bar | Lopez argues gateway innocence allows review despite AEDPA deadline. | State contends AEDPA deadline cannot be overcome by innocence. | Yes; gateway of actual innocence applies to excuse the time bar. |
| Whether the state court's failure to hold an evidentiary hearing on alibi witnesses was unreasonable | Demarest erred in refusing cross-examination and failing to test alibi testimony. | State argues trial strategy and credibility resolved without an evidentiary hearing. | Unreasonable determination of facts; evidentiary hearing warranted; AEDPA(d)(2) satisfied. |
| Whether Guido and Rivera affidavits are admissible for actual innocence/ineffective assistance analysis | Affidavits provide new reliable evidence supporting alibi and credibility concerns. | Affidavits are hearsay and possibly unreliable; Rule 807 merits scrutiny. | Affidavits admissible under residual hearsay (Rule 807) for purposes of actual innocence and ineffective assistance analysis. |
| Whether Lopez's trial counsel was ineffective for not calling alibi witnesses | Lupo failed to interview or call Guido and Rivera; prejudiced López. | Counsel strategically chose not to call witnesses; timing and credibility considerations. | Yes; deficiency in representation; prejudice established; Strickland satisfied. |
| What final remedy federal law requires given the Likely innocence finding | Unconditional release and barring retrial is appropriate due to extraordinary circumstances. | Retrial or different remedies could be considered; not unconditional discharge. | Unconditional release; indictment dismissed; retrial barred; conviction expunged. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (Supreme Court 1995) (actual innocence gateway standard; credibility of new evidence)
- House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (Supreme Court 2006) (compelling innocence standard; broad evidence review)
- Rivas v. Fischer, 687 F.3d 514 (2d Cir. 2012) (establishes actual innocence gateway to overcome AEDPA)
- Morales v. Portuondo, 165 F. Supp. 2d 601 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (unconventional remedies for due process violations; early discharge and retrial denial)
- Doe v. Menefee, 391 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2004) (actual innocence framework and gateway analysis)