Little v. Tynon
- John Cronan
- 1:21-cv-04792
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Little v. Tynon, Judge Cronan denied Charles Little’s petition challenging his New York robbery conviction and adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Charles Little’s federal challenge to his New York first-degree robbery conviction was denied; Superintendent Tynon prevailed as the respondent.
What happened
In Little v. Tynon, Charles Little asked a federal court to review his conviction for first-degree robbery in New York Supreme Court, Bronx County. He argued that he was denied self-representation, received ineffective assistance of counsel, was denied a hearing about his actual-innocence claim, and was actually innocent.
Judge Jennifer E. Willis recommended denying the petition. She concluded that the state courts reasonably rejected Little’s claims about self-representation, his trial lawyer’s failure to consult an eyewitness-identification expert, and an actual-innocence hearing. She also concluded that Little had not made a sufficient showing of actual innocence. Little filed no objections to the recommendation by the deadline.
Judge Cronan independently reviewed the recommendation and adopted it in its entirety. The court denied Little’s petition, declined to issue a certificate allowing an appeal, directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Little v. Tynon · No. 1:21-cv-04792
- John Cronan
- June 30, 2023
Background
On May 27, 2021, Charles Little filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 asking the federal court to review his conviction in New York Supreme Court, Bronx County, for first-degree robbery. His petition raised four grounds:
- He was denied the right to represent himself.
- His trial lawyer provided ineffective assistance by failing to consult an eyewitness-identification expert.
- He was denied a state-court hearing to evaluate the reliability of his actual-innocence claim.
- He was actually innocent.
The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis, who issued a Report and Recommendation on January 27, 2023. She recommended that the petition be denied in its entirety.
Report and Recommendation
Judge Willis concluded that Little had exhausted his state-court remedies for his first three grounds. She determined that the New York Appellate Division, First Department, had not acted unreasonably in finding that Little was not denied self-representation because he had abandoned his request to represent himself.
She also concluded that the state court reasonably determined that Little’s trial lawyer’s conduct met the required objective standard of reasonableness. Judge Willis further concluded that the Appellate Division correctly denied Little’s request for an actual-innocence hearing based on the evidence he presented. Finally, assuming that federal law recognizes a freestanding actual-innocence claim, she determined that Little had not made a sufficient showing of innocence, in light of the compelling circumstantial evidence of guilt identified in the recommendation.
Review and Ruling
The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that they had fourteen days after service to object and that failing to object would waive the right to object or obtain appellate review. No objections were filed by the deadline. The court therefore stated that the parties had waived those rights.
Even so, Judge Cronan conducted a de novo review, meaning an independent review, of the entire Report and Recommendation. He found it well reasoned and its conclusions well founded, and adopted it in its entirety. The court denied Little’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Because Little had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, the court stated that a certificate of appealability would not issue. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment and close the case.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.