Fletcher v. State of Florida

Filing 56

ORDER denying 52 Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment. Signed by Judge Beth Bloom on 1/15/2020. See attached document for full details. (mc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 17-cv-61733-BLOOM/Reid
CLIFFORD CHARLES FLETCHER,
Petitioner,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
/
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Petitioner Clifford Fletcher’s (“Petitioner”)
Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment, ECF No. [52] (“Motion”). In the Motion, Petitioner
takes issue with Magistrate Judge Reid’s reasoning in her Report and Recommendation, ECF
No. [47], which this Court adopted in full on December 4, 2019, ECF No. [50]. The Court has
reviewed the Motion, the record in this case, and the applicable law, and is otherwise fully
advised. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is denied.
“Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes a party to file a motion to
alter or amend a judgment within 28 days after the entry of the judgment. Rule 59 applies in §
2254 habeas corpus cases because those cases are civil in nature.” Bland v. Alabama, No. 2:15CV-0029-MHH-JEO, 2016 WL 10930989, at *1 (N.D. Ala. Oct. 6, 2016) (citing Browder v.
Director, DOC of Ill., 434 U.S. 257, 269-70 (1978); Rule 12, Rules Governing § 2254 Habeas
Cases). However, the United States Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit have made it clear that Rule 59(e) “may not be used to relitigate old matters, or to raise
arguments or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of judgment.” Exxon

Case No. 17-cv-61733-BLOOM/Reid
Shipping Co. v. Baker, 554 U.S. 471, 485 n.5 (2008); see also Stansell v. Revolutionary Armed
Forces of Columbia, 771 F.3d 713, 746 (11th Cir. 2014); In re Kellogg, 197 F.3d 1116, 1119
(11th Cir. 1999) (recognizing that Rule 59(e) motions may only be granted based on “newlydiscovered evidence or manifest errors of law or fact.”); Arthur v. King, 500 F.3d 1335, 1343
(11th Cir. 2007) (“A Rule 59(e) motion cannot be used to relitigate old matters, raise argument
or present evidence that could have been raised prior to the entry of judgment.”). “A motion for
relief under Rule 59(e) is a matter committed to the discretion of the district court.” Bland, 2016
WL 10930989, at *1 (citing Stansell, 771 F.3d at 746).
Here, although Petitioner attempts to cast his arguments as pointing out manifest errors of
law and fact, his Motion does little more than reassert the same previously unsuccessful
arguments. See Jeffus v. Sec’y, Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 759 F. App’x 773, 777 (11th Cir. 2018).
Specifically, Petitioner reasserts the following arguments: (1) on claims 1 and 5, Petitioner
argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to or move to suppress the DNA
evidence taken from him, compare ECF No. [41] at 6, 13; ECF No. [42] at 5, 9; ECF No. [46] at
2-3, 6-7, with ECF No. [52] at 3-5; (2) on claim 2, Petitioner argues that counsel was ineffective
for failing to object to the factual basis for Petitioner’s plea, compare ECF No. [41] at 8; ECF
No. [42] at 6, with ECF No. [52] at 6; (3) on claim 3, Petitioner argues that counsel was
ineffective for waiving Petitioner’s speedy trial rights, compare ECF No. [41] at 9; ECF No. [42]
at 7; ECF No. [46] at 3-4, with ECF No. [52] at 7; and (4) on claim 4, Petitioner argues that
counsel was ineffective for failing to present the testimony of an exculpatory witness, compare
ECF No. [41] at 11; ECF No. [42] at 8; ECF No. [46] at 4-6, with ECF No. [52] at 8. Such
arguments are Petitioner’s improper attempts to relitigate old matters. See Baker, 554 U.S. at 485

2

Case No. 17-cv-61733-BLOOM/Reid
n.5; Stansell, 771 F.3d at 746; In re Kellogg, 197 F.3d at 1119; Arthur, 500 F.3d at 1343. Thus,
the Court concludes that the relief requested must be denied.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner’s Motion, ECF No.
[52], is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on January 15, 2020.

_________________________________
BETH BLOOM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to:
The Honorable Lisette Reid
Counsel of Record
Clifford Charles Fletcher
684215
Charlotte Correctional Institution
Inmate Mail/Parcels
33123 Oil Well Road
Punta Gorda, FL 33955

3