Dantzler v. Rewerts

SAMUEL LEE DANTZLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. RANDEE REWERTS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 20-1059

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

August 25, 2021

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

BEFORE: MOORE, ROGERS, and READLER, Circuit Judges.

ROGERS, CIRCUIT JUDGE.

In January 2006, Bernard Hill was murdered in his girlfriend's apartment when a group of men broke into the apartment and attacked him. Left behind in the apartment was a black knit cap worn by one of the perpetrators. The case went cold until the Detroit Police Department obtained a grant allowing them to test DNA in the cap more than three years later. That DNA evidence led officers to Samuel Dantzler, whom they arrested in connection with the murder. Dantzler's trial counsel understood that the DNA evidence would be crucial and sought to retain an independent DNA expert. The trial court appointed an expert but later decided her fee schedule was exorbitant and did not approve her compensation. When Dantzler's case eventually went to trial, Dantzler's defense counsel had not found another expert to advise on proper cross-examination of the prosecution's DNA experts or to rebut their testimony. Dantzler was ultimately convicted of first-degree felony murder. He appealed his conviction and later sought postconviction relief in the Michigan courts, to no avail. Dantzler petitioned for habeas relief in federal court, which the district court denied. There are three issues on this appeal: (1) whether the Michigan trial court violated Dantzler's due process rights when it denied funding for a DNA expert; (2) whether Dantzler's trial counsel was ineffective for not securing a DNA expert to assist with Dantzler's defense; and (3) whether appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising a claim that trial counsel was ineffective. Because the Michigan Court of Appeals' conclusion that the trial court did not deny Dantzler funding for an expert witness is not an unreasonable application of clearly established law or an unreasonable determination of the facts, the district court properly dismissed the due process claim. Dantzler's ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims also fail because Dantzler does not articulate how the lack of an independent DNA expert prejudiced him, and he is therefore not entitled to habeas relief.

I. The Murder and Investigation

In the early hours of January 16, 2006, Bernard Hill was shot and killed in his apartment. Just a few hours earlier, Hill had assaulted Quiana Turner, his ex-girlfriend and the mother of his daughter. News of the assault spread to Turner's family members, including Samuel Dantzler, who is Turner's uncle. After Hill attacked Turner, he went to the apartment of his girlfriend at the time, Nikitta McKenzie. At around 12:45 AM, a group of about six men dressed in all black broke down the door of McKenzie's apartment. One of the men held a gun to McKenzie's face demanding to know whether Hill was in the apartment. Hill entered the room, and as the men began to fight, McKenzie ran into the bathroom with her cell phone and stood quietly. While she was in the bathroom, one of the attackers shot Hill in the head, killing him. Left behind at the scene of the murder was a black skull cap worn by one of the perpetrators. The police were unable to identify the assailants, however, and the case went cold.

Years later, in September 2009, the Detroit Police Department received a grant that allowed the Department to test the cap for residual DNA. The test results matched Dantzler's DNA profile, and he and his son were tried on the theory that they were part of a "posse" that attacked Hill in retaliation for assaulting Turner. Dantzler's son, Samuel Lamare Dantzler (who eventually pleaded guilty), admitted that he had pointed the attackers to Hill's location, knowing that they had golf clubs and were planning to beat Hill up, although he did not testify at his father's trial.

II. Pre-Trial Proceedings and the Murder Trial

In the months before the trial, Dantzler's counsel, Robert Kinney, sought approval for an independent DNA expert. In July 2010, the trial court approved the request and ordered that the expert make the results available at least ten days before trial, which was scheduled for that October. As the trial date neared, the prosecution still had not turned over the DNA evidence, complicating Kinney's efforts to secure an independent expert. The trial court judge indicated that if the government did not turn over its report to the defense by August 20, he would consider suppressing that evidence. At a pretrial hearing on September 9-approximately one month before the scheduled trial date-Dantzler's counsel still had not received the government's DNA report, likely due to an "overwhelming" backlog. Kinney had contacted the Specklin lab to obtain an expert, but the lab wanted to review the prosecutor's report before committing to assisting Dantzler. Based on discussions of the lab's timeline, it became clear that it was unlikely that the government's report would be completed early enough to give the defense's DNA expert enough time to review it. Although the trial court expressed its reluctance to postpone trial, the court ultimately agreed to move trial to December once Dantzler's counsel made clear that "[w]e need our expert" and Dantzler had waived any speedy trial claims.

On November 24, the trial court entered another order, this time specifically naming Ann Chamberlain as Dantzler's independent DNA expert. The order specified that Chamberlain would be compensated according to her fee schedule. But shortly before trial, an issue arose with Chamberlain's requested fees. Chamberlain demanded a $1, 500 retainer fee, a $250 hourly rate, and $2, 500 for each day of depositions or court testimony. The judge found the retainer to be excessive and denied funding for it.

Before the trial began in December, Kinney recounted his attempts to secure an independent DNA expert. Making no mention of the Specklin lab he had previously contacted, Kinney informed the court that he had attempted to secure Cathy Carr as an expert but that she had a conflict because she had worked with the prosecution on Dantzler's case. On Carr's recommendation, Kinney then reached out to Chamberlain, the expert who was appointed by the trial court just the month before. In a discussion about Chamberlain's rates, the court noted that it had been willing to approve the hourly rate but found her $2, 500 daily fee for depositions or testimony to be "extraordinary" and the retainer to be "exorbitant." The judge explained that he had also consulted with the court's chief judge, who agreed that the requested fees were extraordinarily high. Defense counsel said he "wanted to put that on the [r]ecord because Ms. Chamberlain-well, she wants the retainer or she won't be here." Kinney asserted at one point that his client "is just making sure that Ms. Chamberlain was ready to do her own test, to determine whether his DNA was on the cap." The judge said he did not "preclude" Chamberlain as a witness, to which Kinney responded, "[S]he was supposed to be an expert, she never brought any results, never indicated to our office that she did anything." This discussion between the trial court and defense counsel often veered into other issues, and it was finally cut off when the court called in the jury.

The trial lasted approximately four days. The prosecution called Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Cheryl Loewe. Although Dr. Loewe did not perform Hill's autopsy herself, she had reviewed the autopsy report and testified that Hill's death was the result of "the presence of a single gunshot entrance wound to the back of his head." Loewe also testified that Hill endured blunt force injuries and that there was evidence of a struggle or defensive wounds. The prosecution then called William Niarhos, an evidence technician with the Detroit police, who was responsible for documenting the scene in Hill's apartment. Niarhos said he found the black skull cap on the floor of the apartment, next to a broken television. He testified that the door to Hill's apartment had been forced inward. There was broken furniture, including a dining room table and chairs, in certain areas of the apartment and a trail of blood from the front door to Hill's body.

Janet Burt, Hill's mother, also testified. Burt stated that hours after Hill had attacked Quiana Turner, early in the morning, Samuel Dantzler's son and Turner's brother Rodney banged on the door of her house. Burt did not answer the door, but she saw through the door's peephole the younger Dantzler and Rodney walk to a "gold, long car" outside her home. When they opened the door, Burt could see other individuals in the car but could not identify them. Burt initially stated that she recognized the car to be Dantzler's, but later admitted during cross-examination that it had been months since she had seen Dantzler driving the gold car. Burt also testified about another "strange" incident that day. She said that that she was watching her granddaughter- Turner and Hill's daughter-who was supposed to spend the weekend with her. But that evening, Turner's mother and cousin stopped by to pick up Burt's granddaughter. Shortly after Turner's relatives left, Burt got a call from Hill's girlfriend, McKenzie, who was screaming that Hill had been murdered.

The prosecution also called Nikitta McKenzie, Bernard Hill's former girlfriend, who recounted the events on January 15 and 16. She testified that she had learned from Hill that something had happened between Hill and Turner, that Hill was at her apartment, and that he was acting pretty nervously. At around...