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.

Jordan v. Bartow

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

July 16, 2019

JOEVONE M. JORDAN, Petitioner,
v.
BYRAN BARTOW, Director, Wisconsin Resource Center, Respondent.

          DECISION AND ORDER

          LYNN ADELMAN DISTRICT JUDGE

         The petitioner, Joevone M. Jordan (“Jordan”), is a prisoner in Wisconsin custody seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In 2010, Jordan was convicted of one count of first-degree intentional homicide, Wis.Stat. § 940.01, and one count of attempted robbery, Wis.Stat. §§ 939.32, 943.32(2). Jordan was sentenced to life in prison on the homicide charge and 20 years (12.5 in prison and 7.5 years of extended supervision) on the robbery charge. ECF No. 19-1.

         The parties have briefed the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and the petition is ready for disposition.[1] For the reasons stated below, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.

         I. BACKGROUND

         Roland Haefner was the proprietor of a candy store at 8305 West Silver Spring Drive in Milwaukee, WI. On the evening of June 17, 2009, the proprietor of a nearby shop in the same building heard someone demand money on Mr. Haefner's side of the building and then heard a gunshot. The proprietor ran to Mr. Haefner's booth where she found him unresponsive, before running to a nearby daycare to call 911. Authorities found Haefner lying face-up with a gunshot wound to the chest and later pronounced him dead at the scene. After news of the shooting aired on television, Jordan's mother asked one of Jordan's cousins to ask Jordan about his involvement in the shooting. During the ensuing conversation, Jordan admitted that he had shot the candy store owner. The cousin then proceeded to tell his wife and the police about the details of his conversation with petitioner, alerting authorities to his potential involvement in the shooting.

         A. Fake handgun

         Shortly before his arrest, petitioner went to the home of an acquaintance, Sherita Carter. Petitioner appeared upset because he thought his family was going to turn him in for $2, 000 in reward money. See ECF No. 19-15 at 76-77. Petitioner told Carter that he had a gun and that if the police tried to arrest him, that “[h]e wasn't going to jail. He was going to have a shootout with them.” Id. at 79: 9-10. Carter then called the police. Id. at 78:16-19. Upon arrival, the police found petitioner hiding behind a door in an upstairs room and arrested him. Among the items found on petitioner was a fake handgun tucked in the waistband of his pants. ECF No. 19-16 at 15:3-11.

         Jordan filed a pretrial motion to suppress any evidence that he possessed a fake handgun when he was arrested, arguing that such evidence was irrelevant and misleading. ECF No. 19-11 at 3-4. The trial court disagreed, concluding that possession of the fake handgun at the time of arrest was admissible to show Jordan's “consciousness of guilt.” Id. at 7:4. The trial court held that the fake handgun's probative value was not “unduly prejudicial under [Wis. Stat. §] 904.03, ” finding there was no risk of jury confusion where the weapon used to commit the offense, and that bore Jordan's fingerprints, was a shotgun. Id. at 8:13.

         B. Call #6

          While in custody, Jordan made statements to investigators that were ultimately suppressed by the trial court as violating Jordan's rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). ECF No. 19-10 at 13:6-17. While in jail awaiting trial, Jordan made several telephone calls, some of which were recorded and transcribed. On one such call to his mother (“Call #6”), Jordan referenced the ultimately suppressed statements that he made to the police:

[Mother:] did you even tell them where the gun came from
[Jordan:] uh hum
[Mother:] why
[Jordan:] I told them it was stolen but no I didn't tell them who it came from
[Mother:] why
[Jordan:] there wasn't no need to
[Mother:] ok, and they ask you questions about what
[Jordan:] about where it happened, I mean what happened and all that stuff, then they got me like, then they got my voice like, they ain't got me on camera, like they was saying they did, they got my voice on the surveillance, of me, what was ...

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.