Garlick v. Miller

Background

James Garlick was incarcerated at Coxsackie Correctional Facility after a conviction for first-degree manslaughter and a 20-year sentence. He had filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, a federal procedure for challenging a state-court conviction or custody. He argued that the trial court violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause by admitting an autopsy report without making the report’s preparer available for cross-examination.

On June 2, 2020, then-Chief Judge Colleen McMahon granted Garlick’s petition. The order required the respondent to release Garlick unless the People of the State of New York decided to retry him within 90 days. The State appealed without requesting a stay of that order. On June 24, 2020, the Bronx County District Attorney notified the court that it intended to retry Garlick on the original indictment if the State’s appellate efforts were unsuccessful. After the Second Circuit affirmed the June 2 order and denied rehearing, the State said it would seek review by the Supreme Court and maintained its earlier position that it would retry Garlick if the Supreme Court denied review.

Motion and Arguments

Garlick moved for an order requiring his release. He argued that the June 24 notice did not satisfy the earlier order because it postponed the decision to retry him until after the State completed its appeals. The District Attorney argued that the State had complied by announcing its intent to retry Garlick if it lost those appeals. It also argued that the earlier order did not require the retrial itself to occur within 90 days and that requiring the State to proceed during the appeals could create complications.

Court’s Analysis

Judge Cave held that the June 2 order gave the State two options: release Garlick or decide to retry him within 90 days. The State did neither. Its notice expressed only a contingent intent to retry Garlick after all available appeals, leaving open the possibility that no retrial would occur if the State succeeded on appeal.

The court rejected the argument that the June 2 order implicitly stayed Garlick’s release while the State appealed. Federal appellate procedure generally presumes that a person is released while an order granting custody relief is under review unless a court orders otherwise. The State had not requested a stay and had not shown that the usual factors for obtaining one favored a stay.

The court also distinguished a prior related proceeding in which the court had modified a conditional release order after the respondent requested a stay. Here, the State neither requested a stay nor sought to modify the June 2 order.

Disposition

Judge Cave granted Garlick’s motion. She directed the superintendent or other official at Coxsackie Correctional Facility to release Garlick as soon as practicable. Within 24 hours after release, the parties had to notify the court whether the Bronx Supreme Court had detained Garlick under a new arrest warrant or criminal indictment. If Garlick was not otherwise detained, the federal court stated that it would promptly hold a hearing to decide whether to impose conditions on his release. The clerk was directed to close the motion docket entry. The opinion also directed that the respondent’s name be changed from Superintendent Christopher L. Miller of Great Meadow Correctional Facility to Superintendent Daniel F. Martuscello of Coxsackie Correctional Facility because Garlick had been transferred.