The Case of Gary Tyler
Democracy Now! aired a segment today on Gary Tyler, a black man from Louisiana convicted at age 16 for a murder he probably didn't commit. An excerpt from the segment follows, but if you follow the link you can either hear or watch the entire clip, which includes conversation with a New York Times Op-Ed writer, Tyler's mother and sister. Also included is a never-before aired prison interview with Tyler conducted 10 years ago.
"The case of Louisiana’s Gary Tyler has been called one of the great miscarriages of justice in the modern history of the United States. Tyler, an African-American, has been jailed since he was 16 years old for a 1974 murder that many believe he did not commit. An all-white jury convicted him based entirely on the statements of four witnesses who later recanted their testimony. We speak with Tyler’s mother, Juanita, and his sister Bobbie McCray. We’re also joined by New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, who has been covering Tyler’s case. And we hear Tyler in his own words in an un-aired interview from prison."
"The case of Louisiana’s Gary Tyler has been called one of the great miscarriages of justice in the modern history of the United States. Tyler, an African-American, has been jailed since he was 16 years old for a 1974 murder that many believe he did not commit. An all-white jury convicted him based entirely on the statements of four witnesses who later recanted their testimony. We speak with Tyler’s mother, Juanita, and his sister Bobbie McCray. We’re also joined by New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, who has been covering Tyler’s case. And we hear Tyler in his own words in an un-aired interview from prison."
posted by gabe at 11:09 AM
2 Comments:
Interesting because remember the court's language in Herrera about how much post-conviction courts should credit new exculpatory witness statements. One oculd also distinguish House v. Bell where the court contrasts statements made at the time where there was no obvious reason to lie, or statements by disinterested witnesses.
Where would you place a witnesses' recantations?
If credited, the recantations obviously would make a big difference, if those witnesses' statements really were the only basis for the conviction.
In Tyler v. Phelps, 643 F.2d 1095 (La. 1981), Tyler brought two claims for habeas relief, including (1) that he was convicted on the basis of an unconstitutional jury charge, and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of first degree murder. Both these claims were fully persued on direct review and in state habeas proceedings.
Included in his habeas petition, but not advanced on appeal were the following claims: (1) that he was convicted based on perjured testimony, (2) that the prosecution failed to disclose favorable evidence, (3) that the sentence violated due process and ex post facto, and (4) that his trial counsel was unconstitutionally ineffective. It's not clear from this decision whether these claims were procedurally defaulted. The court says only that they were abandoned on appeal, and therefore waived.
After concluding that the jury instruction in Tyler's case was unconstitutional, the court concludes under Wainwright v. Sykes that the instruction did prejudice the outcome of the jury's guilt or innocence determination. However, the trial lawyer failed to contemporaneously object to the charge, and the court ruled that Tyler could not show cause.
The court quotes an exchange from the state habeas proceeding in which it is obvious that trial counsel was grossly ineffective. Had Tyler advanced (or been able to advance) his ineffective assistance of counsel claim on federal habeas appeal, I think he would have been successful.
The court then considers Tyler's insufficiency of the evidence claim, applying Jackson v. Virginia. It assumes that Tyler fired the shot, and that a rational trier of fact could infer intent from that act. This is despite the fact that the school bus driver asserted at trial that he was present when the police search the bus, and that no gun had been found on the bus. Furthermore, the gun, a .45-caliber pistol, was later discovered to be "stolen" from a police firing range, and dissappeared again before trial. The Court does not reach a discussion of those issues, and I'm not sure they had evidence at the time of the gun coming from the firing range.
Given the above, how likely is it that Tyler could succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim or a Brady claim on a successive habeas petition?
Post a Comment
<< Home