A man serving 45 years for murder loses his federal challenge to his conviction.

Record source: CourtListener

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JOSHUA BARLOW, * Petitioner, * v. * Civil Action No. PX-23-3013 PAIGE C. JONES, et al., * Respondents. * *** MEMORANDUM OPINION Joshua Barlow brings this habeas corpus Petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he challenges his state court murder conviction. ECF No. 1. The Petition is ready for resolution and no hearing is necessary. See Loc. R. 105.6; see also Rule 8(a), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts; Fisher v. Lee, 215 F.3d 438, 455 (4th Cir. 2000). For the following reasons, the Court denies the Petition and declines to issue a certificate of appealability. I. Background A. Trial and Guilty Plea On June 12, 2012, Barlow was indicted in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County for first-degree murder and related crimes. ECF No. 9-1 at 16, 18. Barlow was tried by jury in October of 2013, and convicted on all counts. ECF Nos. 9-4, 9-5, 9-5, 9-6, 9-7. The Circuit Court sentenced Barlow to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. ECF No. 9-8 at 20-21. On April 23, 2015, the Appellate Court of Maryland vacated the conviction, concluding the trial court erred in the manner it reached Barlow’s request to fire court-appointed counsel. ECF No. 9-1 at 120-142. On remand, Barlow decided to forgo retrial and plead guilty to one count of first-degree murder. ECF No. 9-10. As part of his guilty plea, Barlow agreed to facts that could be proven with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, recited by the Assistant State’s Attorney as follows: [O]n or about April 18th, 2012, at approximately two p.m., maintenance men located the body of a female, later identified as Latoya Hall, in a vacant apartment located at 4000 28th Avenue, Apartment Number 301, in Temple Hills, Prince George’s County, Maryland. Ms. Hall was located inside of a closed closet. Her arms were bound behind her back with a black shoestring, her feet were bound together with black electrical tape, and her mouth was gagged with a white tube sock. Ms. Hall was partially undressed, and her body was covered in an unknown white powder. The maintenance men then called police who responded to the scene. Police collected evidence and Ms. Hall’s body was transported to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner where Dr. King conducted an autopsy and ruled that the cause of Ms. Hall’s death was asphyxiation, and the manner of death was homicide. Police were able to obtain Ms. Hall’s identity using a fingerprint scan because no other property belonging to Ms. Hall was found on her body. Police learned in the course of their investigation that Ms. Hall met with an individual on April the 14th of 2012. Police learned this by obtaining text messages from her cellular phone provider. In those messages, Ms. Hall agreed to meet an individual at the location where she was found. Police then obtained cell phone records associated with the phone number that had been communicating with Ms. Hall and based on those records and conversations that were contained therein, police ultimately identified the defendant, Joshua Barlow, who’s seated to my left wearing an orange jumpsuit, as a possible suspect. In conducting their investigation, police learned as well that Mr. Barlow had pawned a necklace on April the 15th of 2012. Ms. Hall’s ex-husband was able to identify that necklace as belonging to Ms. Hall. The defendant was charged and arrested. He waived his rights and agreed to speak with police. He admitted to texting and meeting with the victim. He further admitted to pawning the necklace; however, he indicated that he did not murder Ms. Hall. Police observed scratches on Mr. Barlow’s arm. They then executed a search and seizure warrant at Mr. Barlow’s residence, which was 4000 28th Avenue, Apartment 303, in the same building where Ms. Hall’s body had been found just across the hall. Police recovered several items of evidence when they executed that search warrant including a pair of Nike shoes, one of which was missing a shoelace. Police submitted DNA evidence for analysis. Jessica Charak (phonetic), then of the Prince George’s County Police DNA Lab, analyzed various pieces of evidence. She ultimately reached the conclusion that DNA recovered from underneath Ms. Hall’s fingernails was consistent with the DNA of the defendant Mr. Barlow. Additionally, police submitted the shoestring that was used to bind Ms. Hall’s hands behind her back as well as the shoestring from the remaining tennis shoe that was recovered from Mr. Barlow’s apartment. Ms. Lenora Bender of the ATF would have testified that those two shoestrings were consistent and had come from the same pair of shoes. ECF No. 9-10 at 27-30. The trial court accepted Barlow’s plea and, pursuant to the plea agreement, sentenced Barlow to life imprisonment with all but forty-five years suspended and five years of probation upon release. Id. at 35-36. On September 7, 2017, Barlow applied for leave to appeal the conviction to the Appellate Court of Maryland, which was denied. ECF No. 9-1 at 219-226, 245- 246. B. State Postconviction Petition Barlow next filed a pro se petition for postconviction relief on April 5, 2018. ECF No. 9- 1 at 256-270. At his hearing on the petition, he confirmed that he was challenging: (1) the voluntariness of his plea because he was not advised that the Governor would have to approve his parole or that a violation of parole could result in a life sentence; (2) the court-created a “conflict of interest” in permitting trial counsel’s supervisor, Allen Wolf, to replace trial counsel; (3) trial court’s abuse of discretion in advising Barlow that he risked a life sentence if he went to trial because the advisement was tantamount to urging that Barlow plead guilty; and (4) the trial court’s failure to advise Barlow of the juror unanimity requirement. ECF No. 9-12 at 19-26. On July 15, 2022, the trial court denied the postconviction petition by written decision. ECF No. 9-2 at 80-98. Barlow applied for leave to appeal that decision which the Appellate Court of Maryland denied on July 21, 2023. Id. at 173-185, 210-211. C. Barlow’s Letters to the Trial Court While the postconviction petition was pending, Barlow repeatedly wrote to the trial court asking to for new DNA testing. See ECF No. 9-1 at 391-393, 394-398, 405-410, 411-416, 417- 511; ECF No. 9-2 at 16-19, 20-21, 32-33, 34-41, 42-51, 61-63, 64-67, 68-74, 68-74, 75-78, 99- 103, 104-106, 107-115, 116-124, 129-162. Barlow specifically argued the state’s DNA evidence was based on “junk science” which entitled him to a new DNA test. The trial court, in a written decision issued on June 14, 2023, construed Barlow’s letters as a request for postconviction DNA testing pursuant t

Official opinion source