Miles, Ex Parte Richard Ray Jr.
2012 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 355, 2012 WL 468520, 359 S.W.3d 647 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A claim of actual innocence is cognizable in a post-conviction habeas corpus proceeding and requires an applicant to prove by clear and convincing evidence that, in light of newly discovered evidence, no reasonable juror would have convicted him.
Facts:
- On May 16, 1994, Deandre Shay Williams and Robert Ray Johnson, Jr. were sitting in a parked car at a Texaco station in Dallas.
- An unidentified man walked up to the driver's side of the car and shot both Williams and Johnson with a nine-millimeter handgun, killing Williams and severely injuring Johnson.
- An eyewitness, Marcus Thurman, saw the shooter, described as a tall, dark-skinned Black male wearing dark shorts, a white tank top, and a floppy hat, flee the scene and enter a white Cadillac.
- Approximately twenty-five minutes after the shooting, police arrested Richard Ray Miles, Jr., who is 5'9" and not described as dark-skinned, on a nearby street. At the time of his arrest, Miles was wearing long blue pants, not shorts.
- A police report from May 11, 1994, which was not disclosed to the defense, documented a recent altercation where the victims had threatened a man named William Garland with a sawed-off shotgun.
- An anonymous phone call to police on May 8, 1995, also documented in an undisclosed police report, identified another man, Keith Richard, as the shooter, stating he had confessed to his ex-girlfriend.
- Subsequent investigation revealed that Keith Richard matched the physical description of the shooter (6'6", dark-skinned) and had a history of violence involving a nine-millimeter handgun.
- An unidentified fingerprint was lifted from the victims' car in a location consistent with where a shooter might have placed a hand.
Procedural Posture:
- Richard Ray Miles, Jr. was convicted of murder and attempted murder in the 282nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County (a state trial court).
- The Dallas Court of Appeals (an intermediate appellate court) affirmed the convictions on direct appeal.
- Miles filed an initial application for a writ of habeas corpus alleging a Brady violation concerning a different police report, which was denied by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (the state's highest criminal court).
- Miles, through representatives, later obtained two additional, previously undisclosed police reports via public information requests.
- Miles filed a subsequent application for a writ of habeas corpus in the trial court, alleging a new Brady violation, unreliable scientific evidence, and actual innocence.
- The trial court, acting as the habeas court, conducted a post-conviction investigation, found the claims credible, concluded Miles was actually innocent, and recommended that relief be granted.
- The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals then considered the trial court's recommendation and the merits of the subsequent habeas application.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does newly discovered evidence, including suppressed police reports identifying alternative suspects, the recantation of the sole identifying eyewitness, and the discrediting of key forensic evidence, establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable juror would have convicted Richard Ray Miles, Jr., thus proving his actual innocence?
Opinions:
Majority - Hervey, J.
Yes. The applicant, Richard Ray Miles, Jr., has met the Herculean task of establishing his actual innocence by clear and convincing evidence. The court must weigh the newly discovered exculpatory evidence against the evidence of guilt presented at trial. Here, the State's entire case, which rested on a single eyewitness identification, questionable forensic evidence, and the claim of no other suspects, has been completely undermined. The newly discovered evidence includes: 1) A Brady violation, where the State failed to disclose police reports identifying multiple other credible suspects (Keith Richard, 'Deuce,' and William Garland) and providing an alternative motive for the shooting. 2) The recantation of Marcus Thurman, the sole eyewitness who identified Miles at trial. 3) An affidavit from the State's original forensic expert, Vicki Hall, stating that under her lab's own standards, the gunshot residue test results were actually negative, contrary to her trial testimony. 4) The post-conviction identification of a fingerprint from the crime scene, which belonged to another man who owned a white Cadillac, lived near the scene, and failed a polygraph about his involvement. When this powerful new evidence is balanced against the trial evidence—which already contained significant inconsistencies regarding the shooter's clothing, height, and skin tone—it unquestionably establishes that no reasonable juror would have convicted Miles.
Analysis:
This case provides a significant application of the actual innocence standard in Texas habeas corpus law, demonstrating that a conviction can be overturned even without dispositive DNA evidence. It underscores the profound impact of Brady violations, showing how the suppression of reports identifying alternative suspects can fundamentally undermine confidence in a verdict. The decision highlights the fallibility of traditional forms of evidence, such as eyewitness identification and older forensic science techniques like gunshot residue analysis. The court's willingness to consider the cumulative effect of multiple pieces of new evidence sets a crucial precedent for future actual innocence claims.
Unlock the full brief for Miles, Ex Parte Richard Ray Jr.