Monday, May 24, 2010

Jesse Skinner

Jesse Skinner 82A0442
Fishkill Correctional Facility
Box 1245
Beacon, New York 12508

My name is Jesse Skinner. I’ve been in prison a total of 30 years. But that don’t make my sentence legal. I still have hope that some attorney will handle my case as well as any lawsuit I have coming.

As I look back and see all that I’ve missed in life because I didn’t take the time , patience or energy to learn the law-I blame myself for that.

To any attorney that would like to take my case: I also have a writ of habeas corpus in the supreme court of New York which will be heard on March 17 2010 ( date already passed). Enclosed is a copy of my writ of habeas corpus.

Let me explain some things about my trial. I was found not guilty by the jury of murder in the second degree.
I was found guilty by jury verdict of manslaughter in the first degree, manslaughter on the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in second degree.

That’s when the same judge read the same count of murder in the second degree to the jury again. And they found me guilty.

The sentence I have is a illegal sentence because of inconsistent counts. Two counts are inconsistent when guilt of the offense charged in one necessarily negates guilt of the offense charged in the other.

An example of inconsistent counts would be two counts of murder 2- one charging intent to kill and the other charging deprave indifference.
Guilt of one necessarily negates guilt of the other. Because if the defendant intended to kill he/she could not have been indifferent. See people Vs. Gallagher 69NY.2d 525, 516N.Y.S.2d 174, 508. N.E.2d 909(198&)
Also enclosed is a copy of my personal criminal history record. I hope that someone will take my case.

documents on this post:
1)petition for Writ of Habeas corpu
2)Habeas Corpus
3) People V. Gallagher, model case for Jesse Skinner's case, is summarized in photo of Nre York Supplement 2d series and in transcript of part of article below it.
4-7) verification, affidavit, application for index No., self representation form
8)plea
9)committment
10) colloquy
11) conviction history


Note: document pictures appear before the transcription in most places. Click on pictures to view in bigger size
.

Writ Of Habeas Corpus
click on pictures to view bigger
transcriptions under documents.
Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Queens
The State of New York ex rel.
JESSE SKINNER, PETITIONER,

To the Superintendent of Fishkill Corr. Facility
WILLIAM J. CONNOLLY/ : Respondent-

Writ of Habeas Corpus Index No-2097/79


We command you, that you have the body of JESSE SKINNER, by you imprisoned and detained, as it is said, together with the time and cause of such imprisonment and detention, by whatever
name the said JESSE SKINNER if called or charged before justice of the Supreme Court to be held at _______ o'clock in the _____ noon of the day of_______,2010, to do receive what shall then and there be considered, concerning said JESSE SKINNER, and have you then and there this writ.

WITNESS/ Hon. _______,_ Justice/ one of the Justice of our said Court, this , 2010.


By the Court/
Clerk


Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Queens
In the Matter of the Application of JESSE SKINNER , PETITIONER,
IT.
WILLIAM Jo CONNOLLY, Superintendent of Fishkill Corr. Respondent.
Fac.
Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus Index No.2097/79










To The Supreme Court of The State of New York:
Your petitioner respectfully alleges and shows:

1. That JESSE SKINNER,the petitioner, makes application herein on his own for a writ of habeas corpus, That the place where said JESSE SKINNER is imprisoned and restrained of liberty, is Fishkill Correctional Facility, in the town of Beacon, New York, County of Dutchess, State of New York. That the officer by whom petitioner is so detained is WILLIAM J. CONNOLLY, Superintendent of Fishkill Correctional Facility, That the imprisonment and restraint of said JESSE SKINNER is by virtue of a mandate; a copy of which is hereto annexed and marked "Exhibit A"-
2. That the cause SKINNER, according to the
is illegal detention due
or pretense of detention of said JESSE best knowledge and belief of petitioner to an illegal sentence and detention.
3. That a court or judge of the United States does, not have exclusive jurisdiction to order the said JESSE SKINNER released.
4. That the detention of said JESSE SKINNER is illegal in that the respondents have held him way over his date of release by the miss application of law in that petitioner was illegally sentenced to 25 years to life based on erroneous information in that the verdict sheet of this defendant established that he was and is not guilty of the charge of Murder, however, the court against the verdict sheet which states the petitioner is not guilty sentenced the defendant to 25 to life on a commitment of murder in the second degree even though the verdict sheet establishes a not guilty verdict; a copy of which is hereto annexed and marked "Exhibit B".
5. On January 08, 1982, petitioner was sentenced to manslaughter in the first degree, manslaughter in the second degree, two counts of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, See Sentencing Minutes, pages 22-23; a copy of which is hereto annexed and marked "Exhibt C".
6. where defendant is charged with single homicide/ inconsistent counts would be two counts of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25). one charging intent to kill (subd.l) and the other charging depraved indifference (subd.2). Guilt of one necessarily negates guilt of the other; because/ if the defendant intended to kill/ he could not have effected death by reckless conduct/ and vice-versa.
See People v. Gallagher,69 N_Y.,2d 525, 516 N.Y.S.2d 174, 508 N.E.2d 909 (1987) Below:
7. That on the 15th day of September/ 2008/ an application for writ asked for herein was made by JESSE SKINNER TO THE Honorable MICHAEL ALOISE, J.S.C., at his chambers in the county court house/ New York State Supreme Court/ Queens County/ 125-01 Queens Blvd./ Kew Gardens/ New York 11415, which application was denied/ a copy of which is hereto annexed and marked "Exhibit D".
8. That no appeal has been taken from any order or judgment in any action or proceeding against said JESSE SKINNER whereby petitioner has been imprisoned or restrained of his liberty.
9. That the new facts shown upon the present application that were not previously shown are a citation to People v. Gallagher, supra; which petitioner belief places light on his situation/ and petitioner stable mentally/ petitioner last application/ he was mentally un-stable. j
Wherefore petitioner prays that a writ of habeas corpus directed to said WILLIAM J. CONNOLLY, Superintendent of Fishkill Correctional Facility/ issue requiring the production of JESSE SKINNER before the court for the purpose of inquiring into the cause of the imprisonment and restraint of said JESSE SKINNER and of delivering petitioner therefrom, pursuant to the statute in such case made and provided.
Petitioner-Pro-se.


People v. Gallagher



New York Supplement , 2d series  69 N.Y.2d 530 PEOPLE v. GALLAGHER
 Cite as 516 N.Y.S.2d 174 (Ct.App. 1987) 175
508 N.E.2d 909 69 N.Y.2d 525 PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent-Appellant, Daniel GALLAGHER, Appellant-Respondent. Court of Appeals of New York. May 7, 1987. Defendant was convicted in the Su­preme Court, Suffolk County, Stark, J., of murder in the second degree and man­slaughter in the second degree, and he appealed. The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 116 A.D.2d 299, 501 N.Y.S.2d 355, reversed the manslaughter conviction and affirmed as modified, and appeal was tak­en. The Court of Appeals, Kaye, J., held that, where defendant was charged with single homicide, failure to submit intention­al murder and depraved mind murder counts of indictment to the jury in the alternative was reversible error.
Reversed. Bellacosa, J., concurred and filed opin­ion.
1. Homicide ©=308(4) Where defendant is charged with sin­gle homicide, in indictment containing one count of intentional murder and one count of depraved mind murder, both counts may be submitted to jury, but only in the alternative; one who acts intentionally in shoot­ing person to death cannot at the same time act recklessly. McKinney's Penal Law § 125.25, subds. 1, 2; McKinney's CPL § 300.30, subd. 5.
 2. Homicide ©=340(1), 345 Failure to submit charges of intention­al murder and depraved indifference mur­der, based on single homicide, to jury in the alternative was reversible error which could not be cured by appellate vacation of one of the inconsistent convictions; deter­mination of whether defendant acted inten­tionally or recklessly at time of crime was p jury's function. McKinney's Penal Law § 125.25, subds. 1, 2.
Nathan R. Sobel and Freda S. Nisnew-itz, Brooklyn, for appellant-respondent.527 Patrick Henry, Dist. Atty. (Mark D. Co-hen, Riverhead, of counsel), for respondent-appellant.

OPINION OF THE COURT
KAYE, Judge.
 [1] Where a defendant is charged with a single homicide, in an indictment contain­ing one count of intentional murder and one count of depraved mind murder, both counts may be submitted to the jury, but only in the alternative.
       After an all-night St. Patrick's Day cele­bration involving the consumption of large quantities of alcohol, defendant—a veteran New York City police officer—shot and killed a fellow police officer. Defendant was charged in a single indictment with two counts of murder in the second degree The first count accused him of intentional murder (Penal Law § 125.25[1]), the sec­ond charged him with depraved mind mur­der (Penal Law § 125.25[2]). Priorjtojsub-mitting the case to the jury, the Trial Judge informed counsel of his intention to charge both murder counts as well as man­slaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20[1]) as a lesser included offense of intentional murder, and manslaughter in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.15[1]) as a lesser included offense of depraved mind murder. Defense counsel objected on the ground that such a charge would per­mit the jury to return two guilty verdicts— one under each count of the indictment— and requested that the murder counts be charged in the alternative, thereby allow­ing no more than a single verdict of guilty. The court refused. The jury retired for deliberations and, consistent with the Trial Judge's instructions, returned a verdict convicting defendant of intentional murder (as charged in the first count of the indict-metit) and reckless manslaughter (the less­er included offense charged under the sec­ond count). Defendant was sentenced to 15 years to life on the murder count, and 4 to 12 years for manslaughter, to be served concurrently.
       A divided Appellate Division upheld the trial court's actions, but in the interest of justice modified the judgment by reversing the manslaughter conviction and vacating that sentence, on the theory that defendant should not be punished twice for the same criminal act (see, People v. Perez, 45 N.Y. 2d 204, 209, 408 N.Y.S.2d 343, 380 N.E.2d 174). We now determine that it was error not to charge the two counts in the alterna­tive, and therefore reverse defendant's con­viction and order a new trial.
        One who acts intentionally in shooting a person to death—that is, with the conscious objective of bringing about that result (Pe­nal Law § 15.05[1])—cannot at the same time act recklessly—that is, with conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such a result will occur (Penal Law § 15.05[3]). The act is either intend­ed or not intended; it cannot simultaneous­ly be both. Thus, where the shooting (the act) and the death (the result) are the same, a defendant cannot be convicted twice for the murder, once for acting "intentionally" and once for acting "recklessly" (see, Peo­ple v. Brown, 32 A.D.2d 760, 301 N.Y.S.2d I 687, affd without opn. 27 N.Y.2d 499, 312 I N.Y.S.2d 676, 260 N.E.2d 870).
        It follows, therefore, that the two second degree murder counts in the present indict­ment—intentional murder and depraved mind murder—are inconsistent counts as defined in CPL 300.30(5), because guilt of one necessarily negates guilt of the other. A finding that defendant committed inten­tional murder by killing his victim with the conscious objective of causing his death precludes the inconsistent finding that de­fendant at the same time committed de­praved mind murder [saoby recklessly and thus unintentionally killing that same vic­tim under circumstances evincing a de­praved indifference to human life. By no rational theory could the jury have found defendant guilty of both crimes.
     





VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS
MR. JESSE SKINNER_____, the above-named petitioner, being duly sworn, says that the contents of the foregoing petition are well known to him, and that the same is true to his own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated on information and belief, and as to those matter he believes it to be true.
MR/ JESSE SKINNER
fr82-A-0442, Pro-se
FISHKILL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
P.O. Box 1245
BEACON, NEW YORK 12508


SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 25th
DAY OF January ,2010
David J Howard
Notary Public
State of New York
No. 01H06048723
Qualified in Duchess County
Commission Expires
October 2. 2010



AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS
MR. JESSE SKINNER
being duly sworn/ deposes and says
1. I am over the age of 18 and reside at Fishkill Correctional Facility, P.O. Box 1245, Beacon, New York 12508.
2. On JANUARY, 2010, I served the within
Affidavit In Support of Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus relief Article 70, and for Assignment Of Counsel New York County Law Article 18-b.
Upon:
The Queens County District Attorney
At the following address:
NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT
Queens County
125-01 Queens BLVD.
KEW GARDENS, NEW YORK 11415
by depositing a true copy of the within in a post paid properly addressed wrapper, in an official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the Department of Correctional Services of New York.
MR/ JESSE SKINNER
#82-A-0442, Pro-se
FISHKILL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY
P.O. Box 1245
BEACON, NEW YORK 12508
SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS
DAY OF NOTARY

1C
David- J Howard; Notary- Public State of New York -No, 01 HG804S723 Qualified in -Dutchess Count Commission Expires October 2,. 2010





Application For Index Number
QUEENS -•••................COUNTY CLERK
Application for INDEX NUMBER
In the Matter of the Application of JESSE SKINNER,
Petitioner,
INDEX NUMBER
Writ of Habeas Corpus
vs.
WILLIAM J. CONNOLLY,
Superintendent of Fishkill Corr. Facility Respondent. ____ ___________
INDEXED AND ENTERED

Title of Action or Proceeding to be TYPED or PRINTED by applicant.
Supreme Queens
................COURT, .................... COUNTY
JESSE SKINNER
vs.
INDEXED AND ENTERED
ICLOCK DA T()
WILLIAM J. CONNOLLY Superintendent of Fishkill Corr.

photo of self representation form.


PLEA




MR. JESSE SKINNER, I82-A-0442, Pro-se. Fishkill Corr. Facility P.O.Box 1245 Beacon, New York 12508_________________________ New York State Supreme Court DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Queens County 125-01 Queens Blvd., Kew Gardens, New York 11415
COMMITMENT TO THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICE
At a Criminal Term of the Supreme
PRESENT:
Justice of the Supreme Court, Indictment No. .2.P.9.7"7.9....
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
vs.
Jessie Skinner
Defendant
On 12/10/81 defendant was found guilty by jury verdict of:
Murder 2nd deg Sentence: Min 25 yrs Max Life
Manslaughter 1st deg " Min 12 1/2 yrs Max 25 yrs
Robbery 1st deg (2cts) " Min 12 1/2 yrs Max 25 yrs on each ct
Crim Poss Weapon 2nd deg " Min 7 1/2 yrs Max 15 yrs
All sentences to run concurrent with each other. Arraigned and admits predicate felony.
Bottom scan
below:Colloquy page one and two.



transcription of colloquy above:
"pre-sentence report: in aid of sentence. In that regard, of course, it is relevant to state for the record that the probation department is not an arm of your attorney’s office. It is an aid to this court. The law allows counsel to submit to this court a pre-sentence report to add anything that may have been left out in the probation report, so we accept no responsibility with respect to anything that is not contained in the probation report by you or your counsel feel is necessary, If you fail to share it with us, we don't have it before us,

You stand convicted,sir, before this court of manslaughter in the first degree, manslaughter in the second, two counts of robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

With respect to the offense of manslaughter in the first degree, it is the judgement of this court, that you be sentenced, to an indeterminate term of imprisonment having been found to a predicate felony to a term of not less than twelve and one half years, no more than twenty-five. With respect to murder in the second degree, it is
the judgement of the court that you be sentenced to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of not less than twenty-five, no more than life.

With respect to each of the robbery first degree count, it. is the judgement of this court that you be sentenced to a indeterminate term of imprisonment of twelve and one half to twenty-five years with respect to each of those offenses. With respect to the offense of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, it is the judgement of this court that you be sentence to an indeterminate term of imprisonment, not less than seven and one half, no more than fifteen years.
That constitutes the sentence of this court.
THE CLERK: Jessie Skinner, you have the right to appeal to the Appelate Division, Second Department within thirty days. You may apply to the Appelate Division for assignment of counsel believe to ' prosecute the- appeal as a poor person and. dispense with printing, .
Defendant is remanded.
MR, HOHAN: Your Honor —
THE COURT: Yes, counsel? , MR. HORAK: I would like Mr, Skinner.



conviction history







About FFUP

FFUP is a prisoner support group, non profit, dedicated to the concept that we are all brothers and sisters and once we lock a person up , we are responsible for his or her treatment. In these blogs and webs we seek to counteract the hysteria about criminals and discuss the root causes of crime while presenting the human face of prisons.