Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Runnels v. Edwards

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division

April 8, 2019

DONALD KEITH RUNNELS
v.
GOVERNOR EDWARDS

         SECTION P

          TERRY A. DOUGHTY, MAG. JUDGE

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN L. HAYES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Petitioner Donald Keith Runnels, a prisoner in the custody of Louisiana's Department of Corrections proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed the instant Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, [doc. #s 1, 9], on approximately February 12');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2019.[1" name="FN1" id= "FN1">1] Petitioner attacks the sentence that the Thirty-Third Judicial District Court, Allen Parish, imposed on his simple burglary conviction.[2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2" name="FN2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2" id="FN2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2] For the following reasons, it is recommended that the Petition be dismissed without prejudice.

         Background

         Petitioner was charged with simple burglary and theft of less than $500.00 on approximately December 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">23, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2010. [doc. # 9-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, p. 35]. On October 12');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2011, a jury found him guilty of simple burglary. [doc. # 9-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, 16');">p. 16].

         On October 19, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2011, before the trial judge sentenced Petitioner, the State filed a habitual offender bill of information. [doc. # 9-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, p. 32');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2]. On December 15, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2011, while the habitual offender bill was pending, the trial judge sentenced Petitioner. [doc. # 9-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, 16');">p. 16]. For the simple burglary conviction, the judge sentenced Petitioner to ten years of incarceration at hard labor, with three years suspended, and to four years of supervised probation. See Runnels v. Warden, Avoyelles Marksville Detention Center, No. 13-cv-101 (W.D. La. 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013). For theft, the judge imposed a concurrent six-month sentence of incarceration. Id.

         On January 17, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, under 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">28 U.S.C. § 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">22');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">254 before the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Lake Charles Division. Runnels v. Warden Avoyelles Parish Detention Center, No. 12');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2-cv-0084 (W.D. La. 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2). The court struck the petition because Petiitoner failed to submit it on an approved form and failed to either pay the filing fee or submit an in forma pauperis application. Id. at doc. 6.

         On August 14, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, the state trial court held a contradictory hearing to determine whether Petitioner should be sentenced as a habitual offender. [doc. # 9-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, pp. 41, 47-64].

         Petitioner appealed his sentences and convictions to Third Circuit Court of Appeal, raising several claims for relief: (1) sufficiency of the evidence; (2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2) ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) improper use of notes by witnesses; (4) improper jury instructions; (5) misconduct by the state; (6) alleged bias by the trial court; and (7) excessiveness of his sentence. See Runnels, No. 13-cv-101 (doc. 6). On November 7, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, the appellate court affirmed his conviction and sentence for simple burglary, but vacated the sentence for theft because “nothing in the record indicat[ed] that a verdict was rendered either by the jury or by the trial court on [that] count.” State v. Runnels, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2-167 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/7/12');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2), 101 So.3d 1046');">101 So.3d 1046, 1050.

         On November 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">29, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, the trial judge sentenced Petitioner “as a habitual offender to imprisonment at hard labor . . . for 15 years, without benefit of probation or suspension of sentence, in accordance with LSA R.S. 15:52');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">29.1(G).” [doc. # 9-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, p. 43].

         On January 15, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013, Petitioner filed a second Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, under 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">28 U.S.C. § 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">22');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">254, before the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Lake Charles Division, challenging his simple burglary conviction and associated sentence. Runnels, 13-cv-101. He claimed: “(1) that he should have been tried by a twelve person jury rather than six, (2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2) that his counsel provided ineffective assistance, (3) that the jury instructions were improper jury instructions, and (4) that the sentence imposed was excessive.” Id. at doc. 6. On January 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">27, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2014, the court dismissed the petition without prejudice, finding that Petitioner failed to exhaust his claims. Id. at doc. 10.

         On January 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">23, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013, Petitioner filed a third Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, under 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">28 U.S.C. § 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">22');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">254, before the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Lake Charles Division, claiming that the state trial judge should not have used his 1996 conviction as a predicate for finding, relative to his 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2012');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2 sentence for simple burglary, that he was a habitual offender. Runnels v. Warden, Tensas Parish Detention Center, No. 13-cv-2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">209 (W.D. La. 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013). The court construed the petition as an attack on both the 1996 conviction and the 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2011 conviction supporting the sentence that Petitioner challenges here. Id. at doc. 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, p. 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2. On July 14, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2014, the court dismissed the petition with prejudice, finding Petitioner's claims time-barred. Id. at doc. 4.

         On February 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">28, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013, Petitioner filed an application for supervisory and/or remedial writs before the Supreme Court of Louisiana. See Runnels v. Warden, Avoyelles MarksvilleDetention Center, No. 14-cv-503, doc. 102');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2, p. 3, (W.D. La. 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2014). The Supreme Court of Louisiana denied Petitioner's application on July 31, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013. State ex rel. Runnels v. State, 2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2013-0498 (La. 7/31/13), 118 So.3d 112');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">21');">118 So.3d 112');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">2');">21. Petitioner ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.