Holt v. Smith

1

JOHN LEE HOLT, Petitioner, v. OAK SMITH, Warden of San Quentin State Prison, Respondent.^[1]

No. 1:97-cv-06210-DAD

United States District Court, E.D. California

April 26, 2023

DEATH PENALTY CASE

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (REDACTED): (1) CONDITIONALLY GRANTING HABEAS RELIEF ON GUILT PHASE CLAIMS 11, 12, 13 (portion) and 14, (2) DECLINING ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; AND (3) DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO SUBSTITUTE OAK SMITH AS THE RESPONDENT WARDEN AND ENTER JUDGMENT

NOTICE REGARDING REDACTION

On July 10, 2006, this court entered a protective order pursuant to Bittaker v. Woodford, 331 F.3d 715 (9th Cir. 2003), concerning the files of Petitioner's trial counsel, including the files and notes made by experts investigators, paralegal/legal assistants, and others involved in the preparation of the defense of petitioner's trial.^[2] (See Doc. No. 138 at 6-8.) The protective order includes within its reach testimony in this proceeding referring to such confidential materials, as well as testimony by petitioner, trial counsel or any investigator or expert retained by trial counsel. (Id.) The protective order continues in effect after the conclusion of the habeas corpus proceedings and specifically shall apply in connection with all state court proceedings including a retrial of all or any portion of petitioner's criminal case. (Id.)

In the order below, the Court has redacted allegations filed under seal and evidence from exhibits and state court records filed and lodged under seal. The court, throughout this order refers to confidential information and testimony that otherwise appears in the public record. Where noted, sealed content and confidential information and testimony not in the public record has been redacted. Issued concurrently with this memorandum and order is an unredacted version of the memorandum and order, filed under seal.

*****

Petitioner John Lee Holt is a state prisoner sentenced to death proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He is represented in this action by appointed counsel Robert Myers and Assistant Federal Defender Jennifer Mann.

Respondent Oak Smith is named as Warden of San Quentin State Prison. He is represented in this action by California Deputy Attorney Generals Sean McCoy and Peter Thompson.

Before the court for a decision following the limited evidentiary hearing that took place before the undersigned on October 24 26, and November 1, 2017 are the following claims asserted in petitioner's writ of habeas corpus filed December 1, 1998 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254: claim 11 (alleging petitioner's incompetence to stand trial), claim 12 (alleging ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to raise incompetence to stand trial), claim 13 (alleging ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to raise certain mental state defenses at the guilt phase of the trial), claim 14 (alleging ineffective assistance of counsel by calling petitioner to testify at the guilt phase of the trial), claim 15 (alleging ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to request lesser included jury instructions to rape, and trial court error by sua sponte failing to give such lesser included instructions),^[3] and claim 16 (alleging ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to investigate and defend against the rape charge).^[4]

After careful consideration of the record and the parties' post-hearing briefs, the undersigned: (i) conditionally grants federal habeas relief as to petitioner's guilt phase claims 11, 12, 13 (portion), and 14 and vacates petitioner's conviction and sentence entered on May 30, 1990 in People v. John Lee Holt, Kern County Superior Court Case No. 39910;^[5] (ii) denies federal habeas relief as to petitioner's guilt phase claims 2, 3, 6, 8, 9 (portion), 10, 13 (portion), 15, and 16;^[6] and (iii) declines to issue a certificate of appealability.^[7] The court does not address the unresolved claims in the federal petition, rendered moot hereunder.^[8] Should a higher court disagree with this court's conclusions granting federal habeas relief as to the guilt phase claims, this court will consider the unresolved claims at that time.

BACKGROUND FACTS

This factual summary is taken from the California Supreme Court's summary of the facts in its May 19, 1997 opinion on direct appeal. The summary of facts is presumed correct except to the extent inconsistent with the court's intrinsic review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2). (See Doc. No. 96 at 144, 150, 153, 236-37, 259 268-72); 28 U.S.C. § 2254(e)(1); see also Taylor v. Maddox, 366 F.3d 992, 999 (9th Cir. 2004) (acknowledging Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act ("AEDPA") deference to state court factual findings) (overruled on other grounds by Murray v. Schriro, 745 F.3d 984, 999-1001 (9th Cir. 2014), as recognized by Prescott v. Santoro, 53 F.4th 470, 480 (9th Cir. 2022)); Vasquez v. Kirkland, 572 F.3d 1029, 1031 n.l (9th Cir. 2009) ("We rely on the state appellate court's decision for our summary of the facts of the crime.").

Guilt-Phase Evidence

A. The Prosecution Case

Defendant had been employed for one month in door-to-door sales of household cleaning products on July 6, 1989, when he called at the Bakersfield home of 65-year-old Marie Axtell, a widow who lived alone. He had undergone a short training period before being sent to Bakersfield on July 3, 1989, as part of a 15-person sales crew which was staying in a local hotel. On the morning of July 6, defendant and Cameron Bearden, who had been assigned to assist in training defendant, worked together on one street, after which they split up. Defendant was repeatedly rebuffed in his efforts to make sales.

When defendant arrived at the home of Ms. Axtell, she was lying on the living room sofa. The door was open. When she said she did not want his products, defendant jerked opened the screen door, entered the living room, and sexually assaulted Ms. Axtell, first in the living room and then in the master bedroom of the home. Ms. Axtell was strangled and rendered unconscious at some point during the assault. Defendant then took jewelry from the bedroom, root beer from the refrigerator in the kitchen, and money from Ms Axtell's wallet, which was on the kitchen table. Returning to the bedroom, he left the unopened root beer on a dresser, took more jewelry, and departed. His company identification badge was found in the living room. His fingerprints were found on items throughout the house, including the root beer can.

Glenn Copeland, Ms. Axtell's son, who lived in Tehachapi, had visited the Axtell house about 8 a.m. He left at 9 a.m. to do an errand for his mother. When he left the house, Ms. Axtell's purse and wallet were on the kitchen table. On Copeland's return to the house about 11:30 a.m., he saw a brown briefcase near the front door. The screen door, which his mother had latched when he left, was unlatched and open several inches. The latch had been bent. Alarmed, he entered and found his mother unconscious, lying facedown on the floor in the bedroom. What appeared to be a bag was in her mouth and a cloth was wrapped around her neck and double knotted. Copeland called 911, and after again checking his mother's condition went next door to seek assistance. As he left the house he confronted defendant who was picking up the briefcase. When accused, defendant denied being inside the house. When Copeland again accused defendant of being in the home, defendant said he was going to check with his boss in the van across the street. There was no van across the street. Copeland directed defendant to remain, but when Copeland returned two minutes later from the house of the neighbor, defendant and the briefcase were gone. Emergency vehicles arrived several minutes later and Ms. Axtell was taken to the hospital.

Just after he saw an ambulance on the street defendant was supposed to be working on, Cameron Bearden saw defendant near the pickup area for the sales crew. Defendant beckoned him to come over. Bearden observed that defendant was "hyper," his hair was "messed up," and he did not have his briefcase. The briefcase was one issued to salespeople by the company. It contained a "sales kit" of items used in making the sales presentation. Defendant said his briefcase was at the pickup area. Bearden saw the briefcase at the pickup stop. Defendant and Bearden were picked up by a supervisor in a company van. Defendant told the supervisor that he had not made any sales. The supervisor then dropped the two men off in the same area even though defendant said he wanted to work in another area. Defendant left the sleeveless vest he always wore, even in the Bakersfield heat, in the van.

The two men were then stopped by Detective West who had heard a police radio call regarding an attempted homicide and a description of a suspect. Defendant was carrying a brown briefcase. The location of the detention was one block from Ms. Axtell's home. West questioned defendant and Bearden who denied having been on the street on which Ms. Axtell's home was located. He spoke to them for about 10 minutes.

Aubin, another officer, who had heard a description of the suspect, arrived to back up West, as defendant and Bearden were walking away. He detained defendant and Bearden at the request of Detective Vest who arrived with Ms. Axtell's son. Glenn Copeland told the officers that he believed he recognized the briefcase carried by defendant, and one of the men as the person he had seen at his mother's house.

The officers conducted a pat-search of Bearden and defendant preparatory to placing them in a patrol car. Aubin found a pen, ointment jar, and jewelry in defendant's right front pants' pocket. Defendant was arrested and a more thorough search revealed $160

...