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.

Delafuente v. Richard

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

January 18, 2018

LUIS DELAFUENTE, Petitioner,
v.
RHONDA RICHARD, Warden, Madison Correctional Institution Respondent.

          Michael R. Barrett District Judge

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          MICHAEL R. MERZ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This is an action on a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1), filed March 9, 2017.[1] On Order of Magistrate Judge Karen Litkovitz (ECF No. 2), the Respondent has filed the State Court Record (ECF No. 3) and a Return of Writ (ECF No. 4). Petitioner filed a Reply (ECF No. 10) and then, without leave of court, an Amended Reply (ECF No. 12). Magistrate Judge Litkovitz then permitted Respondent to file a Surreply (ECF No. 16) and allowed Petitioner to respond (ECF No. 19). The reference of the case was transferred to the undersigned to help balance the Magistrate Judge workload in the Western Division (ECF No. 20).

         Procedural History

         Petitioner was indicted by the Butler County grand jury on two counts of felonious assault arising from the stabbing of Tim Hull and Rene Cervantes on August 17, 2014. A jury convicted Delafuente on both counts and he was sentenced to six years imprisonment. On appeal the Ohio Twelfth District Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. State v. Delaffuente, [2] 2015-Ohio-4917, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 4776, 2015 WL 7709866 (12th Dist. Nov. 30, 2015), appellate jurisdiction declined, 145 Ohio St.3d 1425 (2016). Petitioner then filed the instant Petition, pleading the following four grounds for relief:

Ground One: Fourth Amendment right to due process was violated when the trial court refused to present the issue of self-defense.
Ground Two: The court must provide a self-defense instruction if the evidence viewed most favorably to appellant could support a claim of self-defense.
Ground Three: Petitioner's inability to recall every detail of the fight does not preclude him from claiming self-defense.
Ground Four: Self-defense may be argued in the alternative if the jury requests the instruction.

(Petition, ECF No. 1, Page ID 6, 8, 9, 11.)

         Analysis

         Federal habeas corpus is available only to correct federal constitutional violations. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a); Wilson v. Corcoran, 562 U.S. 1 (2010); Lewis v. Jeffers, 497 U.S. 764, 780 (1990); Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209 (1982); Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939 (1983). "[I]t is not the province of a federal habeas court to reexamine state court determinations on state law questions. In conducting habeas review, a federal court is limited to deciding whether a conviction violated the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68 (1991).

         Habeas relief may be available where a violation of state law “amounts to a fundamental miscarriage of justice or a violation of the right to due process in violation of the United States Constitution.” Cristini v. McKee, 526 F.3d 888, 897 (6th Cir. 2008), cert denied, 129 S.Ct. 1991 (2009). “State law errors may warrant habeas relief if the errors ‘rise for some other reason to the level of a denial of rights protected by the United States Constitution.'” Hoffner v. Bradshaw, 622 F.3d 487, 495 (6th Cir. 2010), quoting Barclay v. Florida, 463 U.S. 939, 957-58 (1983). “State law issues are not subject to habeas review, see Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67-68, 112 S.Ct. 475, 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991).

         On appeal, Delafuente raised one assignment of error, to wit, that “The trial court erred by refusing to present the issue of self-defense to the jury.” Delafuente, supra, ¶ 4. The Twelfth District overruled that assignment of error, ruling as follows:

[*P5] In his single assignment of error, Delaffuente argues the trial court erred by denying his request to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of ...

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.