United States District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
OPINION AND ORDER
A. WHITE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on Petitioner's petition for a
writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Petitioner, a pro se prisoner currently incarcerated at Davis
Correctional Facility in Holdenville, Oklahoma, challenges
his conviction and sentence in Pontotoc County District Court
Case No. CF-2010-73 for Endeavoring to Manufacture
Methamphetamine, after two or more felony convictions. He
sets forth the following grounds for relief:
I. The evidence was not sufficient to prove the offense
charged by the State.
II. The improper admission of an irrelevant and prejudicial
video that demonstrated the production of methamphetamine
deprived Mr. Lovin of a fair trial, requiring a new trial or
III. The prejudice of improper details of Mr. Lovin's
legal history inappropriately introduced to the jury through
the State's exhibits resulted in an inflated sentence.
IV. Under the facts of the case Mr. Lovin's sentence is
excessive and should be modified.
V. Petitioner was denied due process when the preliminary
hearing magistrate also conducted Petitioner's jury trial
without Mr. Lovin's consent, in violation of the Fifth
and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution
and Okla. Stat. tit. 22 § 576.
VI. Petitioner was denied Sixth Amendment effective
assistance of trial counsel during plea negotiations.
VII. Petitioner was denied Sixth Amendment effective
assistance of appellate counsel when appellate counsel failed
to raise the claim of trial counsel's ineffectivness
during plea negotiations.
respondent concedes that Petitioner has exhausted his state
court remedies for the purpose of federal habeas corpus
review. The following records have been submitted to the
Court for consideration in this matter:
A. Petitioner's direct appeal brief.
B. The State's brief in Petitioner's direct appeal.
C. Summary Opinion affirming Petitioner's judgment and
sentence. Lovin v. State, No. F-2012-58 (Okla. Crim.
App. Feb. 27, 2013).
D. Petitioner's application for post-conviction relief.
E. Post-conviction findings by the trial court.
F. Petitioner's petition in error to the Oklahoma Court
of Criminal Appeals.
G. Order Affirming Denial of Application for Post-Conviction
Relief. H. State court record.
I. Transcripts of preliminary hearing and jury trial.
the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, federal
habeas corpus relief is proper only when the state court
adjudication of a claim:
(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved
an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal
law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States;
(2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable
determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented
in the State court proceeding.
28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
I: Sufficiency of the Evidence
alleges the State failed to meet its burden of proof to
sustain his conviction for Endeavoring to Manufacture
Methamphetamine. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals
(OCCA) denied relief on this claim in Petitioner's direct
. . . Lovin argues that the evidence is insufficient to prove
endeavoring to manufacture a controlled dangerous substance.
This Court addresses a challenge to the sufficiency of the
evidence by viewing the evidence in the light most favorable
to the State, accepting all inferences that support the
verdict, and asking whether any rational trier of fact could
have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Warner v.
State, 144 P.3d 838, 863 (Okla. Crim. App. 2006) (citing
Spuehler v. State, 709 P.2d 202, 203-04 (Okla. Crim.
The elements of Endeavoring to Manufacture Methamphetamine
are: 1) knowingly; 2) endeavoring; 3) to manufacture; 4) the
controlled dangerous substance of methamphetamine. Okla.
Stat. tit. 63, § 2-408; OUJI-CR (2d) 6-3B.
“Endeavoring means any effort to do or accomplish the
evil purpose that the law was enacted to prevent.”
OUJI-CR (2d) 6-16. The evidence introduced by the State,
including purchases made by Lovin at Wal-Mart on January 8,
2010; the video depiction of the methamphetamine
manufacturing process in conjunction with the explanatory
testimony of Agent Dean; the admissions of Lovin; and the
evidence found in the back of Lovin's car on February ...