Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A man convicted in 2000 of murder and three felony counts of criminal recklessness has failed to convince the Delaware Circuit Court that he is entitled to a new trial.
Judge Linda Ralu Wolf denied Michael Bruno’s petition for post-conviction relief, filed in December 2021, which alleged grounds for a new trial.
Wolf issued her judgment order Aug. 23.
Bruno was convicted of murder after he and a group of men, in October 1999, attempted to go to a party and were denied entry because it was for Ball State University Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity students only.
According to court records, the group decided they were going to leave the party and come back with guns.
Bruno used one of the men’s handguns, which was a .380 pistol.
The group gathered in an alleyway near the back of the house and shot into the house.
When they were done, there were 18 bullet holes in the back of the home and three people were injured, and one man died.
The Indiana Supreme Court upheld Bruno’s conviction in Bruno v. State, 774 N.E.2d 880, 882 (Ind. 2002).
Bruno, pro se, filed a petition for post-conviction relief in July 2003. By counsel, Bruno filed an amended petition in May 2022 and then a second amended petition in June.
The circuit court held a June 30 petition for post-conviction relief hearing on the grounds, raised by Bruno, that his trial counsel did not provide effective assistance of counsel.
One of the other grounds which Bruno raised was that his convictions should be vacated because there was newly discovered evidence in the case.
Bruno claimed that recanted testimony by three witnesses provided grounds for a new trial.
At the PCR hearing, Djuane McPhaul wanted to recant certain things from his trial testimony.
“He said that he was recanting the testimony that on the evening in question he saw everyone’s hands go up. He asserts that fact is not true. Even if McPhaul were now to be believed, his very specific recantation leaves the remainder of his trial testimony intact,” the finding order stated.
The order also stated that the court found it suspicious Jerriel Williams has come forward 23 years later to say he lied about hearing Terrance Manley say “let’s do this” before the 1999 shooting.
Tyrone Mason testified at trial that he heard either Manley or Bruno say the phrase.
“When viewed through the lens of Indiana Pattern Criminal Instruction 1.1700, the PCR testimony of Jerriel Williams is simply not credible or worthy of belief,” the finding order stated.
Louis Abram claimed parts of his trial testimony were false, but the trial court found his actions and testimony to not be credible or worthy of belief.
“Abram admitted that he lied at trial. Not only has Abrams committed perjury, but he has breached his agreement with the State, and he can now be charged with murder and conspiracy to commit murder. However, Abram is clearly not concerned about this possibility because he is currently serving a de facto life sentence in the State of Georgia for various sex offenses and will never get out of prison. Therefore, he is free to say whatever he desires about this case and not ever have to worry about being held accountable for his actions,” the finding order stated.
The court found that the only evidence of recantation of trial testimony came from McPhaul, Williams and Abram, who all admitted they lied.
“The Court finds McPhaul’s actions and testimony to be not credible nor worthy of belief. The Court likewise finds that the testimony of Williams and Abram to be not credible nor worthy of belief,” the order stated.
The court also rejected Bruno’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or that his counsel, Darnail Lyles, had an actual conflict of interest during his representation of Bruno because he had been a member of the Kappa fraternity during law school at Howard University.
Bruno also claimed that the state failed to reveal deals it made with witnesses as a freestanding claim of prosecutorial misconduct.
However, the court found that Bruno cannot make a freestanding claim of prosecutorial misconduct in a post-conviction relief petition.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.