FAHY v. HORN, et al

Filing 97

ORDER THAT PETITIONER'S PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS GRANTED AS TO CLAIM A,C, AND D. THE PETITION IS DENIED AS TO CLAIM B,E,F,G AND H. PETITIONER'S DEATH SENTENCE IS VACATED; THE EXECUTION OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS STAYED FOR 180 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER, ETC; AFTER 180 DAYS, IF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PA HAS NOT CONDUCTED A NEW SENTENCING HEARING, THE WRIT SHALL ISSUE AND THE COMMONWEALTH SHALL SENTENCE PETITIONER TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT PAROLE; A CERTIFICATE O F APPEALABILITY IS GRANTED AS TO CLAIMS A, C, D, E, AND F. IF EITHER PETITIONER OR RESPONDENTS FILE AN APPEAL TO THE USCA FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, THE ENTRY OF THIS ORDER WILL BE STAYED PURSUANT TO EASTERN DISTRICT OF PA LOCAL RULE 9.4 (12) PENDING DISPOSITION OF THE APPEAL.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE NORMA L. SHAPIRO ON 8/26/14. 8/26/14 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED TO COUNSEL (COPY TO LEGAL).(lvj, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

HENRY FAHY

:
:
v.
:
:
MARTIN HORN, Commissioner, Pennsylvania :
Department of Corrections;
:
CONNER BLAINE, JR, Superintendent of the :
State Correctional Institution at Greene; and
:
JOSEPH P. MAZURKIEWICZ, Superintendent :
of the State Correctional Institution at Rockview :

CIVIL ACTION

NO . 99-5086

THIS IS A CAPITAL CASE

ORDER
AND NOW, this 26th day of August, 2014, upon consideration of:
A.

Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (paper no. 1);

B.

Memorandum of Law in Support of Petitioner Henry Fahy’s Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus (paper no. 16);

C.

Petitioner’s Consolidated Amendments to Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and
Supplemental Memorandum (paper no. 42);

D.

Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Respondents (paper no. 46), the
accompanying Memorandum of Law (paper no. 47) and Exhibits (paper no. 48);

E.

Petitioner’s Reply Memorandum in Support of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(paper no. 52);

F.

Response to Petitioner’s Reply Brief (paper no. 55);

G.

The record of Petitioner’s case in state court, the expanded record and the evidence
presented at evidentiary hearings held by this court on November 18, November 22,
and December 12, 2002;

H.

This court’s memorandum and order filed August 26, 2003 (paper no. 72);

I.

The Court of Appeals’s opinion, Fahy v. Horn, 516 F.3d 169 (3d Cir. 2008), and
order (paper no. 79);

1

J.

Respondent’s Supplemental Memorandum of Law and Exhibits (paper no. 86);

K.

Petitioner’s Supplemental Memorandum of Law Following Remand (paper no. 87);

L.

Response to Petitioner’s Supplemental Memorandum of Law Following Remand
(paper no. 88);

M.

Oral argument before this court; and

N.

Post-argument letters and responses (papers no. 91, 93, 94).

It is ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner Henry Fahy’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED as to:
a.

Claim A1 (Trial counsel was ineffective at sentencing phase for failing to
reasonably prepare for capital sentencing and failing to develop and
present available and compelling mitigating evidence”);

b.

Claim C (“Henry Fahy’s death sentence violates the Sixth, Eighth and
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution because the jury
was not permitted to consider and give effect to all of the non-statutory
mitigating evidence that was presented”); and

c.

Claim D (“Trial counsel was ineffective during the sentencing phase for
suggesting Mr. Fahy would likely be released on parole . . .”).

2. The Petition is DENIED as to:
a.

Claim B (“Trial and appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to object
to and litigate the claim that the penalty phase instructions
unconstitutionally precluded jurors from weighing mitigating factors
unless the jury first unanimously found those factors”);

b.

Claim E (“The prosecutor misleadingly diminished the jury’s sense of
responsibility for imposing sentence upon Mr. Fahy, in contravention of
Caldwell v. Mississippi, and in violation of his rights under the Sixth,
Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments”);

c.

Claim F (“Mr. Fahy’s sentence must be vacated because of prosecutorial

misconduct during the sentencing phase of Fahy’s capital trial, in violation
of his rights under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to

1

The claims are referred to as reordered in Petitioner’s Supplemental Memorandum of
Law Following Remand.
2

the United States Constitution”);
d.

Claim G (“ Mr. Fahy’s sentence must be vacated because the jury was

unconstitutionally instructed on the ‘torture’ aggravating circumstance in
violation of Fahy’s rights under the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth
Amendments to the United States Constitution”); and
e.

Claim H (“ Henry Fahy is entitled to relief from his death sentence because

Pennsylvania’s (D)(9) ‘significant history’ of violent felony convictions
aggravating circumstance is unconstitutionally vague in violation of the
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution”).
3. Petitioner’s death sentence is VACATED;
4. The execution of the writ of habeas corpus is STAYED for 180 days from the date of
this Order, during which period the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania may conduct a new
sentencing hearing in a manner consistent with this opinion;
5. After 180 days, if the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has not conducted a new
sentencing hearing, the writ shall issue and the Commonwealth shall sentence Petitioner to life
imprisonment without parole;

6. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2253, a certificate of appealability is GRANTED as to
Claims A, C, D, E, and F.

7. If either Petitioner or Respondents file an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit, the entry of this Order will be stayed pursuant to Eastern District of
Pennsylvania Local Rule 9.4 (12) pending disposition of the appeal.

/s/ Norma L. Shapiro
J.

3