Camarano v. Griffin

Background

Robert Camarano, proceeding without a lawyer, petitioned under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for federal habeas relief from New York convictions for second-degree murder and third-degree criminal mischief. The trial court imposed consecutive sentences of 25 years to life for murder and two to four years for criminal mischief.

Camarano initially limited his federal petition to a claim that delays in completing his direct appeal violated due process. In supplemental briefing, he focused primarily on a different claim: that he was overmedicated during trial, making him incompetent and unable to represent himself. He also claimed actual innocence, alleging that two police detectives and an emergency medical technician killed Michelle Hyams and that the prosecutor and others participated in a cover-up.

The Appellate Division affirmed Camarano’s convictions and sentence. It upheld the decision allowing him to represent himself, found his claims about impairment and actual innocence unreviewable on direct appeal because they relied on facts outside the trial record, and rejected his constitutional claims concerning appellate delay. The New York Court of Appeals denied leave to appeal.

Appellate-Delay Claim

The court treated the appellate-delay claim as having been decided on the merits by the state courts. Under the federal habeas statute, a federal court generally may not grant relief unless the state court’s decision was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established United States Supreme Court law.

Judge Pauley held that no clearly established Supreme Court law recognized a constitutional right to a speedy criminal appeal. He therefore deferred to the Appellate Division’s rejection of Camarano’s appellate-delay claim and denied relief on that claim.

Overmedication and Competency Claim

The court held that Camarano procedurally defaulted on his claim that overmedication made him incompetent and unable to represent himself. Although he raised a similar argument in a state-court motion to vacate the judgment, he did not seek permission to appeal the denial of that motion. The time for seeking that permission had expired, so the federal court treated the claim as procedurally barred.

The court also explained that Camarano’s separate presentation of related allegations in his direct appeal did not cure the default. The Appellate Division had ruled that those factual claims could not be reviewed on direct appeal and should instead have been developed through the state-court motion to vacate.

A procedurally defaulted claim may sometimes be reviewed if the petitioner shows a legally sufficient reason for the default and resulting prejudice, or makes a valid showing of actual innocence. Judge Pauley found that Camarano made neither showing. The court additionally stated that, even if the claim were not procedurally defaulted, it would fail on the merits because the trial record showed that Camarano repeatedly insisted on representing himself, despite the trial judge’s warnings, and did not show impairment that rendered him incompetent.

Actual-Innocence Claim

The court held that Camarano had not exhausted his actual-innocence claim in state court because he did not raise it in his state-court motion to vacate, which was the available method for presenting factual material outside the trial record.

The court nevertheless rejected the claim on the merits of its legal availability in a federal habeas case. It explained that the Supreme Court has recognized that a credible and compelling actual-innocence showing may sometimes allow a petitioner to overcome a procedural barrier, but has not decided that a freestanding claim of actual innocence alone supports habeas relief. Judge Pauley therefore rejected Camarano’s freestanding actual-innocence claim as not appropriate for review in this proceeding.

Disposition

The court denied Camarano’s habeas petition. It declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Camarano had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the case, and directed chambers staff to mail Camarano a copy of the order.