The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sifton, Senior Judge.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner Howard Porter was convicted in 2003 before the undersigned of seven counts of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(5)(B),*fn1 2252A(b)(2),*fn2 and three counts of transporting and shipping child pornography by computer in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(1),*fn3 2252A(b)(1).*fn4 After a jury trial, he was sentenced to 48 months in custody, to be followed by 3 years of supervised release. Petitioner began serving his supervised release on August 31, 2007. On November 13, 2007 I found that petitioner had violated a condition of his supervised release*fn5 and imposed a sentence of four months in custody, to be followed by 32 months of additional supervised release. One of the special conditions I imposed as part of the terms of the supervised release required that the defendant participate in a mental health treatment program tailored to sex offenders, as identified by the Probation Department. Petitioner finished serving his additional four month sentence on February 26, 2008, and began serving his second period of supervised release. On March 3, 2008 he began attending a sex offender treatment program at the New York Forensic Center for Neuropsychology and Forensic Behavioral Science. Because of his poor participation, on August 19, 2008 he was discharged from the program. Following a hearing, I found that defendant had violated the terms of his supervised release by failing to participate meaningfully in sex offender mental health treatment, and on January 29, 2009, I imposed a sentence of nine months incarceration, without any term of supervised release to follow.
Petitioner now moves to vacate his conviction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, raising the following claims: (1) that the court's refusal to appoint trial-level counsel violated petitioner's right to counsel under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(1)(E); and (2) that counsel who represented him at the violation hearing was in fact ineffective. Petitioner has also appealed his sentence to the Second Circuit and requests, if his habeas petition is denied, that this court stay his sentence pending appeal. For the reasons set forth below, petitioner's § 2255 application and his request for a stay are denied.
Familiarity with the factual background of this matter is presumed based on the record of proceedings before the undersigned. For a more complete description of the facts of this case, see U.S. v. Porter, No. 03-CR-0129 (CPS), 2007 WL 3541525 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2007) and U.S. v. Porter, No. 03-CR-0129 (CPS), 2008 WL 5377946, (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2008).
Between October 7, 2002 and December 2002, an undercover detective from the Wichita, Kansas Police Department, posing as the mother of a four-year-old daughter in Wichita, entered a chat room believed to be frequented by individuals interested in exchanging child pornography or engaging in sexual activities with children. Mr. Porter initiated contact with the detective, and several chat sessions ensued in which Mr. Porter discussed the possibility of engaging in sexual activity with the four-year-old daughter. Mr. Porter also sent the detective e-mail messages with attached images of child pornography. Law enforcement officers obtained a warrant to arrest Mr. Porter and search his home, which was executed on January 9, 2003. Among the evidence seized in the home were computer materials containing images of child pornography and ten photographs of children, including Mr. Porter's minor son.
Mr. Porter was arraigned on January 9, 2003, and signed an unsecured bond in the amount of $150,000 in which he agreed to conditions of pretrial release set by Magistrate Judge Azrack. These conditions included restriction of travel to New Jersey and New York City, surrender of his passport, weekly in-person reports to and random visits by the Pretrial Services Agency, evaluation and treatment for mental health problems, forbearance from unsupervised contact with children, and a ban on Internet use. On January 28, 2003, Magistrate Judge Mann imposed additional conditions of drug and alcohol testing and treatment as well as cessation of employment or volunteer work with the National Coalition for Civil Rights.
On January 30, 2003, Mr. Porter was indicted on three counts of transporting child pornography in interstate commerce. The indictment was superseded by a fourteen-count indictment on April 23, 2003, charging Mr. Porter with three counts of transporting and shipping child pornography by computer in interstate commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(1), 2252A(b)(1), and 3551 et seq., and eleven counts of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(5)(B), 2252A(b)(2), and 3551 et seq.
In accordance with the conditions of his pretrial release, Mr. Porter was evaluated at the New York Center for Neuropsychology and Forensic Behavioral Science. The evaluation concluded that defendant's primary sexual interest is in adolescent females . . . he endorsed items which reflect justification for pedophilic behavior, the types of rationalization and/or excuses used frequently by individuals who are sexually involved with children . . . he attempts to present himself in a socially desirable light . . . Mr. Porter is either unwilling to openly discuss his offending behavior, and/or, lacks substantial insight into the nature of the same.
Mem. From Melissa A. Roman, United States Pretrial Services Officer, Apr. 3, 2003, at 1-2 (internal quotation marks omitted).
The treating facility also determined that Mr. Porter was "in need of individual therapy to: monitor his mental status over time; and, to confront his distorted thinking, and gain insight into his offending behavior." Id. at 1. Mr. Porter refused to participate in treatment. While on pretrial release, Mr. Porter also failed to attend a pretrial services appointment, report a change in employment, and be present for a scheduled home visit.
On July 9, 2003, Mr. Porter and his former wife, Annette, were divorced in Staten Island Supreme Court. They had been wed on November 20, 1999, and their marriage produced one child, Andrew.
A jury trial of Mr. Porter commenced on October 7, 2003, and on the government's motion, one count of possession of child pornography was dismissed. On October 16, 2003, the jury acquitted Mr. Porter on three counts of possession, found Mr. Porter guilty on the remaining seven counts of possession, and found Mr. Porter guilty on all three counts of transportation. Mr. Porter remained on conditional release following the verdict and pending sentencing.
At the time of Mr. Porter's sentencing, Mr. Porter's criminal history included a conviction in 1987 for battery of a Florida law enforcement officer and disorderly conduct resulting in a sentence of three years of probation; a conviction in 1993 for disorderly conduct in Putnam Valley, New York, in connection with an arrest for criminal contempt; and driving while intoxicated, which occurred pending sentencing on the jury's verdict.
Also in 2003, Mr. Porter's son was removed from his custody by the Administration for Children's Services on neglect charges, with custody eventually transferred to his son's great- aunt.
In December 2003, a permanent injunction was issued by the Volusia County Court of Florida barring Mr. Porter from contacting his former wife and their child, Andrew.
On March 10, 2004, the government moved for Mr. Porter's remand, which the Court granted based on Mr. Porter's violation of the following conditions of his release: Mr. Porter
(1) was twice seen by Administration for Children's Services workers at a public library, each time on internet chatrooms; and
(2) failed to report a driving while intoxicated arrest as required.
Following his sentencing on May 15, 2004, Mr. Porter moved for bail pending appeal. I denied the motion, finding Mr. Porter to be a danger to the community. On July 20, 2005, Mr. Porter again moved for release pending appeal, claiming that he had demonstrated a substantial likelihood of reversal on the seven possession counts, which would reduce his sentence, and that he was not a danger to the community or a flight risk. The motion was denied on September 15, 2005.
Mr. Porter appealed his conviction and sentence to the Second Circuit. On June 5, 2006, the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction but remanded to the undersigned for re-sentencing, under United States v. Fagans, 406 F.3d 138 (2d Cir. 2005). U.S. v. Porter, 184 Fed. Appx. 112, 115 (2d Cir. 2005). In June 2006, Mr. Porter moved for release pending re-sentencing which the court denied in October 2006. On November 1, 2006, Mr. Porter was resentenced to 4 years imprisonment and 3 years supervised release. Mr. Porter appealed the November 1, 2006 sentence to the Second Circuit, and that court affirmed the sentence on July 20, 2007. U.S. v. Porter, 2007 WL 2090147 (2d Cir. 2007).
On February 22, 2007, Mr. Porter filed a new motion for bail pending appeal. On April 5, 2007, Mr. Porter's motion was denied, because (1) Mr. Porter had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on appeal or a substantial issue of law or fact likely to result in a reduced sentence to less than the time he would have served when the appeals process was likely to be completed; and (2) Mr. Porter had not demonstrated that the danger which he presented to the community would be significantly reduced or eliminated in the time left on his sentence by medical or correctional treatment outside the prison system.
Mr. Porter thereafter filed a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on April 30, 2007. Porter v. U.S., 127 S.Ct. 2149 (2007).
On July 30, 2007 Mr. Porter filed a pro se motion to vacate judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) based on the court's rulings with respect to discovery issues before his October 2003 trial. I denied this motion in a Memorandum and Opinion dated November 13, 2007.
On August 16, 2007, Mr. Porter filed a pro se motion for injunctive and declaratory relief from the requirements of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act ("SORNA") and modification of supervised release. Specifically, Mr. Porter sought (1) to enjoin his registration under SORNA claiming that the statute violated the ex post facto clause of the Constitution; (2) access to Richmond and Kings County because of pending legal actions, as well as the state of New Jersey where his son resides; and (3) suspension of mandatory drug testing. I denied this application on January 2, 2008.
On August 31, 2007, Mr. Porter was released from prison and began his three-year sentence of supervised release. The following special conditions of supervised release were imposed in addition to the Eastern District's standard conditions of release:*fn6 Mr. Porter was required to (1) follow the directions of the Probation Department with respect to psychiatric and substance abuse treatment; (2) not use any computer or Internet connection for the purpose of gaining access to child pornography; and (3) submit to monitoring, directly or electronically, of any personal computer, in order to assure compliance with condition (2).
On September 7, 2007, following Mr. Porter's unsuccessful search for a primary residence, the Probation Department moved for a modification of the conditions of ...