Kramer Levin successfully represented Damecha Harris in overturning his 1992 state court robbery conviction, for which he already had served 12 years, on the basis of his trial counsel’s constitutionally deficient performance.  Mr. Harris’s saga began in January 1992, when he was convicted of second degree robbery based solely on the eyewitness testimony of the victim.  Prior to trial, Mr. Harris’s court-appointed counsel had obtained a copy of the complaint report prepared thirty minutes after the incident, in which the victim described her assailant as a black male, 5’4”, tall and weighing 130 pounds; Mr. Harris, in contrast, is a black male, 6’ tall, and weighed 220 pounds at the time of his arrest.  Despite this glaring discrepancy, Mr. Harris’s trial counsel never attempted to use the prior inconsistent statement to impeach the victim, notwithstanding his argument to the jury based on mistaken identification.  In the twelve years following his conviction, Mr. Harris repeatedly petitioned the state and federal courts to overturn his conviction, but was rebuffed until 2001, when the Second Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case to permit Mr. Harris to pursue his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

In early 2003, District Court Judge Frederic Block appointed Eric Tirschwell, a former prosecutor in the Eastern District of New York, to represent Mr. Harris.  The Kramer Levin team, including Jennifer Rochon, Grace O’Hanlon, Michael Tremonte, and, later, Parthena Psyllos, first had to overcome procedural obstacles, and then briefed the ineffective assistance issue and conducted a hearing at which they cross-examined the client’s original trial counsel.  Based on this showing, Judge Block vacated Mr. Harris’s conviction, concluding that “the failure of Harris’ counsel to confront [the witness] at trial with her prior inconsistent statement … is inexcusable” and that “a more compelling example of ineffective representation is difficult to fathom.”  Although the government initially stated it would retry Mr. Harris, Kramer Levin’s vigorous representation eventually led to dismissal of all charges.

Wells Dixon represents a prisoner in his appeal from a judgment of conviction, upon a jury verdict, on three counts of grand larceny in the fourth degree and one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree.  Our client also appeals from the imposition of consecutive sentences for the grand larceny offenses.  Although a grand jury refused to indict our client for robbery, the government presented improper evidence at trial that he robbed three women in the Bronx with a deadly weapon.  The government also argued improperly that our client should be sentenced for robbery.  The trial court further erred by imposing consecutive sentences for the grand larceny offenses without making any finding that those offenses constituted more than a single act as required by the Penal Law and in violation of our client’s constitutional rights under Apprendi v. New Jersey and related decisions.  Our client’s appeal is now pending before the Appellate Division, First Department.  Eric Tirschwell and Alison Sclater, legal assistant Santo Anthony Cipolla, and then-summer associate Fernando Tamayo have assisted on this appeal.

Home: Pro Bono Annual Report