Case Law Winbush v. Boyd

Winbush v. Boyd

Document Cited Authorities (19) Cited in Related
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Clifton L. Corker United States District Judge

Now before the Court is a prisoner's pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in which Petitioner challenges several drug-related convictions [Doc 1]. Petitioner has also filed many motions, including a motion to amend his petition [Doc. 6], which is GRANTED to the extent that the Court will consider the arguments therein below. However, after reviewing the parties' filings and the state court record, the Court finds that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief under § 2254. Accordingly, no evidentiary hearing is warranted, see Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, Rule 8(a) and Schriro v Landrigan, 550 U.S. 465, 474 (2007), the petition for a writ of habeas corpus will be DENIED, this action will be DISMISSED, and the remaining motions [Docs. 7, 8, 14, 18, 29, 30, 32] will be DENIED as moot.

I. BACKGROUND

In its opinion addressing Petitioner's convictions on direct appeal, the Tennessee Criminal Court of Appeals (“TCCA”) summarized the underlying state court criminal proceedings against Petitioner as follows:

The Knox County Grand Jury charged [Petitioner], along with multiple codefendants, via presentment, with the following offenses:

Offense Charged
1 Conspiracy to possess with the intent to sell 150 grams or more of a Schedule I controlled substance (heroin) in a drug-free zone
2 Conspiracy to possess with the intent to deliver 150 grams or more of a Schedule I controlled substance (heroin) in a drug-free zone
3 Conspiracy to sell 150 grams or more of a Schedule I controlled substance (heroin) in a drug-free zone
4 Conspiracy to deliver 150 grams or more of a Schedule I controlled substance (heroin) in a drug-free zone
5 Conspiracy to possess with the intent to sell a Schedule II controlled substance (oxycodone) in a drug-free zone
6 Conspiracy to possess with the intent to deliver a Schedule II controlled substance (oxycodone) in a drug-free zone
7 Conspiracy to possess with the intent to sell a Schedule II controlled substance (oxymorphone) in a drug-free zone
8 Conspiracy to possess with the intent to deliver a Schedule II controlled substance (oxymorphone) in a drug-free zone
15 Failure to appear for arraignment for offense of driving without a valid license
16 Possession with the intent to sell less than 15 grams of a Schedule I controlled substance (heroin) in a drug-free zone
17 Possession with the intent to deliver less than 15 grams of a Schedule I controlled substance (heroin) in a drug-free zone
18 Possession with intent to sell less than 200 grams of a Schedule II controlled substance (oxycodone) in a drug-free zone
19 Possession with intent to deliver less than 200 grams of a Schedule II controlled substance (oxycodone) in a drug-free zone
20 Possession with intent to sell less than 200 grams of a Schedule II controlled substance (oxymorphone) in a drug-free zone
21 Possession with intent to deliver less than 200 grams of a Schedule II controlled substance (oxymorphone) in a drug-free zone
23 Destruction of evidence
25 Failure to appear for arraignment for offense of driving without a valid license
26 Failure to appear for arraignment for offense of criminal impersonation

Counts 9 through 14, 22, and 24 of the presentment did not include charges against [Petitioner]. Counts 5 and 6 were dismissed prior to trial.

Trial
The case proceeded to trial and a jury found [Petitioner] guilty of Counts 1-4, 7-8, 18-19, and 20-21. The jury acquitted [Petitioner] on Counts 15-17, 23, and 25-26. Counts 2-4 and 7-8 were merged into Count 1. Count 19 was merged with Count 18, and Count 21 was merged with Count 20. The trial court sentenced [Petitioner] ¶ 20 years' incarceration for each conviction in Counts 1-4 and 7-8, and 3 years for each conviction in Counts 18-19 and 20-21. The sentences in Counts 1-4 and 7-8 were run concurrently with each other. Additionally, the sentences in Counts 18 and 20 were run concurrently with each other, but consecutively to Count 1, for an effective sentence of 23 years.
The trial testimony established [that] Knoxville Police Department (KPD) Investigator Philip Jinks, recognized as an expert in the fields of drug and conspiracy investigations learned about the drug operation that transported heroin from Detroit to Knoxville in this case in late 2012 or early 2013. The heroin involved in the investigation was a “brown-rocky-type substance, ” or black tar that looks like “a black[, ] gummy substance.” The heroin was not a type he had seen before. Being an experienced investigator, Investigator Jinks knew that people involved in the drug trade tried to hide who they were by renting vehicles and houses in other people's names, and paying people in cash or drugs. The dealers used multiple cell phones, called “burner phones, ” and did not use them for long periods of time. The dealers did “everything they [could] to avoid law enforcement contact and us[e] their real information.” Dealers often used code when talking or texting each other. Oxycodone pills were known as “roxies, ” “blues, ” or “Rs.” Oxymorphone pills were known as “opanas” or “moons.” Dealers did not typically carry drug paraphernalia, needles, or filters with them, as they were not users.
Ohio State Highway Patrol Officer Jason Archer conducted a stop on January 3, 2013, of a vehicle containing Christopher Holloway, August Allen, and Nicole Ferris. During the stop, Officer Archer found a marijuana cigarette, 4.68 grams of heroin, and .52 grams of cocaine. He also found a bottle of white powder that was later identified as a cutting agent. Eventually, Investigator Jinks learned that the people in this vehicle were involved in drug transactions in the Knoxville area.
KPD Officer Joey Whitehead stopped a car on March 6, 2013 in Knoxville because the driver was not wearing a seatbelt. After the car stopped, the unidentified driver ran into a nearby apartment at Christenberry Heights on Dutch Valley Road in Knoxville. Richard McFadden was a passenger in the vehicle. Officer Whitehead knocked on the door of the apartment, and Amanda Maples answered. Ms. Maples consented to a search of the apartment. Officer Whitehead observed a yellow folder in the apartment. The folder contained paperwork from Ohio regarding Mr. Holloway's arrest for drug trafficking. Officer Whitehead knew that Investigator Jinks had an ongoing drug investigation and reported the information to Investigator Jinks.
On March 25, 2013, Knox County Sheriff's Officer James Trout stopped Mr. McFadden at the Greyhound bus station. Mr. McFadden had marijuana, $9100 cash, and a set of digital scales on his person. Mr. McFadden was going to Detroit. Mr. McFadden indicated the money was from marijuana sales. Mr. McFadden consented to a search of his cell phone. Text messages consistent with the sale of heroin were found on the phone. In one text message, Mr. McFadden directed someone to the Adair Manor Apartments, and told them to [c]all D.” Ms. Maples confirmed that the $9100 belonged to [Petitioner].
During his investigation, Investigator Jinks heard the nicknames “Ooh” and “Nunu.” At some point he learned that “Ooh” was Mr. Allen and that “Nunu” was Mr. McFadden. Eventually Investigator Jinks identified Coleman Strickland, Tim Ford, Nicole Farris, Joseph Green, Megan Huffaker, and [Petitioner] as those involved in the drug conspiracy. The locations in Knoxville being used by [Petitioner] and co-conspirators for dealing the drugs were 1313 New York Avenue, Adair Manor Apartments, an apartment on Dutch Valley Road, locations on Merchants Drive and Cedar Bluff Road, and 173 Chickamauga Avenue. Ms. Maples rented the house at 1313 New York Avenue. [Petitioner] paid rent for the residence and provided Ms. Maples with heroin in exchange for placing the 1313 New York Avenue residence in her name.
Investigator Jinks employed Nicole Bryant as a confidential informant during his investigation. He paid Ms. Bryant $40 cash for each controlled buy. Each controlled phone call between Ms. Bryant, Mr. Allen, Mr. Green, and [Petitioner] was recorded. Each controlled buy was monitored live and video recorded by police. The funds used to purchase the drugs were photocopied or photographed prior to each transaction, so the dollars could be identified by serial number if they were found during the course of the investigation.
On June 13, 2013, Ms. Bryant participated in a controlled buy from Mr. Allen. The buy was set up during a phone call to XXX-XXX-9692. Ms. Bryant went to the Adair Manor Apartments to complete the purchase. Investigator Jinks observed Mr. Allen and Mr. Green enter the apartment building. Ms. Bryant completed the purchase of .16 grams of heroin described as a “bluish-grey, rocky substance.” []
On June 20, 2013, Investigator Jinks and Ms. Bryant conducted another controlled buy. Ms. Bryant met Mr. Allen at 1313 New York Avenue. When Ms. Bryant arrived, Mr. Allen was outside the residence. Testing confirmed that the drugs purchased by Ms. Bryant were .14 grams of “bluish-grey” heroin. After the buy, police officers followed Mr. Allen in a Chevrolet Trailblazer driven by Ms. Huffaker to a Christenberry Heights apartment, just off Dutch Valley Road.
On June 21, 2013, Investigator Jinks returned to the apartment at Christenberry Heights and observed Ms. Huffaker and Mr. Allen leave in the Trailblazer. He later observed Mr. Green [] in the Trailblazer. They stopped at a McDonald's where Investigator Jinks saw an unknown female get in the back of the vehicle and exit a short time later. Investigator Jinks
...

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex