Trimm v. Kirkpatrick

DUSTIN J. TRIMM, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL KIRKPATRICK, Superintendent, Elmira Correctional Facility, Respondent.

9:18-cv-287 (MAD/TWD)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

March 16, 2021

APPEARANCES:

OF COUNSEL:

O'CONNELL & ARONOWITZ, P.C.

54 State Street

9th Floor

Albany, New York 12207-2501

Attorneys for Petitioner

STEPHEN R. COFFEY, ESQ.

OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK

ATTORNEY GENERAL

28 Liberty Street

New York, New York 10005

Attorneys for Respondent

JAMES FOSTER GIBBONS, AAG

Mae A. D'Agostino, U.S. District Judge:

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

On April 26, 2013, Petitioner Dustin J. Trimm appeared in St. Lawrence County Court and pled guilty to one count of Manslaughter in the First Degree and two counts of Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree. Having exhausted his state court remedies, on March 7, 2018, Petitioner filed a counseled petition for a writ of habeas corpus claiming (1) his guilty pleas were involuntary and (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas without an evidentiary hearing. See Dkt. No. 1.

As set forth below, Petitioner's application is denied.

II. BACKGROUND

A. The Indictments

On February 2, 2012, a St. Lawrence County grand jury indicted Petitioner for Murder in the Second Degree, in violation of New York Penal Law § 125.25(1), for intentionally killing Jason Wing in late August or early September 2010. See Dkt. No. 11-2 at 3.¹ On August 2, 2012, a St. Lawrence grand jury indicted Petitioner for two counts of Disseminating Indecent Material to a Minor in the First Degree, in violation of New York Penal Law § 235.22; two counts of Patronizing a Prostitute in the Third Degree, in violation of New York Penal Law §§ 230.04, 230.02(1)(c); one count of Unlawful Dealing with a Child in the First Degree, in violation of New York Penal Law § 260.20(2); and one count of Endangering the Welfare of a Child, in violation of New York Penal Law § 260.10(1), all involving a 16-year-old victim. See id. at 4-8. On March 28, 2013, a St. Lawrence County grand jury indicted Petitioner for two counts of Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree against victims aged 9 and 13, in violation of New York Penal Law § 130.50(1); two counts of Sexual Abuse in the First Degree against a 13-year-old victim, in violation of New York Penal Law § 130.65(1); one count of Endangering the Welfare of a Child against a 13-year-old victim, in violation of New York Penal Law § 260.10(1); and one count of Predatory Sexual Assault, in violation of New York Penal Law § 130.95(1). See id. at 9-12.

B. Petitioner's Guilty Pleas

Petitioner privately retained counsel Ryan G. Blanch, Esq., and James W. Parkman, Esq., to represent him on the murder indictment and, separately, he retained Richard V. Manning, Esq.,to represent him on the sex-offense indictments.² On April 26, 2013, Petitioner appeared before the Honorable Jerome J. Richards of St. Lawrence County Court and agreed to enter a negotiated guilty plea. See Dkt. No. 11-2 at 38-47. Pursuant to the plea agreement, Petitioner pled guilty to one count of Manslaughter in the First Degree and two counts of Criminal Sexual Act in the First Degree in satisfaction of all three indictments. In addition, Petitioner promised to tell police about the victims of any other crimes he committed in St. Lawrence County, to offer a written explanation of the details of the homicide to the victim's mother, to waive his right to appeal, and to pay restitution in an amount to be determined at sentencing. See id. In exchange, Petitioner would be subject to a maximum of twenty-five years imprisonment to be followed by five years of post-release supervision for the manslaughter conviction, to be followed by determinate terms of seven years of imprisonment and twenty years of post-release supervision for the criminal sexual acts convictions, for an aggregate term of thirty-two years of imprisonment and twenty years of post-release supervision. See id. Moreover, Petitioner would receive immunity regarding any similar crimes he confessed to relating to the unidentified victims he named pursuant to the agreement. See id.

After being placed under oath, Petitioner confirmed that he understood the terms of the plea offer, that the plea offer as recited constituted the entirety of all promises that had been made to him, and that he had no questions about the negotiated agreement. See Dkt. No. 11-2 at 43-52. Petitioner stated that he understood that he was surrendering his rights to remain silent, to pre-trial hearings (including those that had already been scheduled), to a presumption of innocence, to trialby jury, and to object to the evidence and cross-examine witnesses. Petitioner further confirmed that, if he elected to proceed to trial and was convicted of all charges, he faced a maximum of seventy-five years of imprisonment, and that he was voluntarily pleading guilty, and that he was satisfied with his opportunity to discuss the plea offer with counsel. Additionally, Petitioner confirmed that he had not consumed any intoxicating substances or taken any medications within the past twenty-four hours, that he was satisfied with his attorneys, and that he intended to waive his right to appeal. Moreover, Petitioner agreed that he would be subject to potential civil commitment proceedings at the end of his sentence. See id.

Petitioner also admitted that in late August 2010, he intentionally used a rifle to shoot Jason Wing twice in the chest and once in the head, killing him. See id. at 51-52. Further, Petitioner acknowledged that in January 2010, he forced his penis into the anus of another person, and that in the spring of 2011, he forced his mouth onto the penis of another person. See id. at 52-53. Based on Petitioner's admissions, the Court accepted his guilty pleas to the reduced charges. See id. at 53-54.

C. Motion to Withdraw his Guilty Pleas and Sentencing

On or about July 23, 2013, Petitioner moved pursuant to CPL § 220.60 through counsel, Edward F. Narrow, Esq., for permission to withdraw his guilty pleas. See Dkt. No. 11-2 at 55-63. In his motion, Petitioner argues that, although he understood that his aggregate sentence would be thirty-two years of imprisonment, his plea counsel inaccurately advised him regarding the amount of "merit time allowance" he could theoretically receive against his sentence with good behavior and full participation in prison rehabilitative programming. See id. at 58-60. Petitioner also alleged that he was actually innocent, that he was intoxicated at the time of the plea, that he misunderstood the length of the post-release supervision, that he believe the letter he wrote to thevictim's mother would be destroyed, and that counsel failed to fully explain the restitution or civil commitment aspects of his plea offer. See id. On July 31, 2013, Petitioner's plea counsel submitted a joint sworn affidavit noting, among other things, that they had not promised Petitioner any specific amount of sentence reduction but merely described hypothetical possibilities, that they had explained their advice on this point was tentative and uncertain, and that the discussion occurred only after Petitioner decided to plead guilty. See id. at 89-95.

On August 5, 2013, the trial court denied Petitioner's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas. See Dkt. No. 11-2 at 118. Upon denying Petitioner's motion, the trial court proceeded immediately to sentencing. In compliance with the terms of his plea agreement, Petitioner provided the court and district attorney's office with a list of his sex victims, which spanned two pages, and Petitioner received immunity for his offenses committed against these individuals. See id. at 108. At the sentencing, Mr. Wing's mother spoke noting, among other things, that because Petitioner hid Mr. Wing's body after he killed him, "he was in no condition for anyone to see" when discovered two years later and had to be cremated before re-burial. See id. at 120-21. The prosecution also noted that Petitioner had frequently provided drugs and alcohol to the young victims of his uncharged sex crimes. See id. at 126-28. Petitioner spoke prior to sentencing, stating that he was "innocent on all charges" and that he pled guilty because his attorneys told him he would "only serve 18 years, do the programs and become a mentor." Id. at 131. The court rejected Petitioner's statements as incredible and imposed the negotiated sentence. See id. at 134-36. The court also ordered Petitioner to pay $8,196.17 in restitution to the victims in the indictments. See id. at 136-38.

D. The First Federal Petition

On July 7, 2014, Petitioner filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court, arguing, among other things, that this guilty plea was involuntary. On July 23, 2014, the Honorable Thomas J. McAvoy dismissed the petition without prejudice on the basis that he had failed to exhaust his state-court remedies. See Trimm v. Sheahan, No. 9:14-cv-905, 2014 WL 3670723 (N.D.N.Y. July 23, 2014).

E. Petitioner's Direct Appeal

Petitioner appealed his conviction to the Appellate Division, Third Department, with the assistance of counsel, raising substantially the same issues as in his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas and arguing that the lower court abused its discretion in denying that motion. See Dkt. No. 11-2 at 13-33. On June 11, 2015, the Third Department affirmed Petitioner's conviction. See People v. Trimm, 129 A.D.3d 1215 (3d Dep't 2015). The Third Department held that the "thorough and detailed plea colloquy" was "in direct conflict" with Petitioner's allegations of intoxication, and that his "unsubstantiated protestations of innocence" did not warrant relief. See id. at 1216. With respect to his claim that his plea was not voluntary because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, the court held that Petitioner's claims "concern matters outside of the record and are properly the subject of a CPL article 440...