CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo

AfterTheTrial.com... Because There’s Hope After the Trial

BLOG

After The Trial Blog

The After The Trial blog presents insights on ongoing and recent trials around the state of Alabama, including weekly criminal law round-ups.

High Court Reverses Another Alabama Death Sentence

J.D. Lloyd - Monday, June 19, 2017


McWilliams v. Dunn, Comm’r ALDOC

 

Question Presented: Did Alabama courts wrongfully conclude McWilliams was not denied meaningful assistance from a mental-health expert under Ake v. Oklahoma?

 

Facts

 

McWilliams was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for a 1994 robbery/rape/murder that took place in a convenience store in Tuscaloosa. McWilliams’ mental health was explored in depth during the course of his trial. He was examined by a “Lunacy Commission” composed of three doctors at Taylor Hardin Secure Medical Facility. After he was convicted and after the jury recommended he be sentenced to death by a vote of 10-2, McWilliams asked for neurological and neuropsychological exams. The court order a Dr. John Goff, a neuropsychologist with the State, to examine McWilliams. However, Dr. Goff’s findings were not based on a complete review of his mental health records. His report was given to McWilliams only 48 hours before the judicial sentencing phase. On the eve of the judicial sentencing hearing, Taylor Hardin and Holman Prison sent defense counsel updated records which had been subpoenaed months before. Trial counsel continuously asked the trial court for an independent expert and a continuance, but these requests were rejected.

 

Eventually, McWilliams case arrived in federal court when he filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. Among other issues, McWilliams argued that the State deprived him of Due Process under Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68 (1985). McWilliams argued this denial was a violation of “clearly established federal law” and thus entitled him to habeas corpus relief. The district court denied the request.

 

Ake v. Oklahoma

In Ake, the Court ruled that the Constitution requires the State to provide an indigent defendant with “assistance necessary to prepare an effective defense based on his mental condition” if the defendant’s sanity is in question. The ruling was framed around the concept of the “meaningful access to justice.” The expert should “assist in evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense.”

 

Eleventh Circuit Ruling

The Eleventh Circuit denied relief. Initially, the Court concluded that McWilliams failed to meet his burden of showing that “clearly established federal law” entitled him to an independent expert. The Eleventh Circuit noted a split in the circuits regarding whether Ake requires the appointment of an independent expert and that the Supreme Court had never resolved that split. Because the split existed, there was, in the Court’s opinion, no clearly established federal law that could entitled McWilliams relief on this claim. Additionally, the court concluded that the State courts’ determination that Ake had been satisfied was likewise not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

 

Judge Wilson’s dissent

Judge Wilson believed that Ake was not satisfied here. First, the State failed to provide meaningful psychological assistance. McWilliams did not receive any expert assistance until after the sentencing hearing held before the jury. Second, the assistance McWilliams received from Dr. Goff was based on an incomplete review of the mental health records available for consideration. In Judge Wilson’s opinion, this paltry showing did not satisfy Ake and warrants habeas corpus relief.

 

Supreme Court Ruling

The Court ruled that in the particular circumstances of this case, McWilliams’ rights under Ake were not protected. The Court declined to answer the more specific question of whether Ake requires appointment of a mental health expert who is independent of the prosecution because Alabama failed to satisfy “Ake’s most basic requirements.”

 

The Court rejected Alabama’s argument that it complied with Ake by allowing Dr. Goff to examine McWilliams. Ake requires more: “[1] examination and assist in [2] evaluation, [3] preparation, and [4] presentation of the defense.” The Court concluded that even if it were to assume the State satisfied the “examination” requirement, it completely failed to satisfy the last three prongs.

 

While the 11th Circuit had ruled that whatever error McWilliams suffered was “harmless,” the Supreme Court noted that ruling was limited to just the question of whether the requested continuance would have made a difference in McWilliams sentencing. The Court pointed out that on remand the 11th Circuit should consider how the State’s failure to guarantee the remaining three prongs of Ake would have made a difference in McWilliams’ case.

 

Dissent (Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch)

The dissent would have had the Court address the narrow question of whether it is clearly established federal law that Ake requires the appointment of an independent mental health expert. The dissent complains that Alabama didn’t have a chance to address the question the Court actually addressed. However, this simply isn’t true. Alabama briefed the merits of the underlying Ake claim at the merits stage.

 

The 11th Circuit on Remand

The Eleventh Circuit is likely to kick the case back down to the district court to address the full Ake question. It’s hard to see McWilliams’ death sentence standing when the Supreme Court has all but said 3 aspects of Ake weren’t satisfied here.

 

If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.


 


Recent Posts


Tags

cullman alabama sentencing law and policy blog summaries editorial operation crackdown Kay Ivey nathan woods huntsville Walker County Alabama shelby county ex parte briseno death penalty, pell city alabama keith v state illegal gun carry attempted murder endangerment of a child springville alabama animal cruelty drug busts department of justice murder Alonzo Ephraim talladega superspeedway Adamsville alabama sixth amendment court of criminal appeals Thomas Hardiman pruitt v state state of alabama mcwilliams v dunn social media Hillary Clinton, bernard v north dakota ake v oklahoma steve avery eleventh circuit ruling oneonta alabama court systems, Briarwood Presbyterian Church fourth amendment theft terell corey mcmullin Samuel Alito capital murder john earle redfearn IV v state SCOTUS, alfonso morris greene county alabama Woods v State Tracie Todd bailey v us boaz alabama fultondale alabama warrantless blood draws Stephen Breyer pinson alabama russell calhoun foley alabama hall v florida peyton pruitt Dylann Roof abandonment stanley brent chapman banville v state drug activity dothan alabama criminal mischief William Pryor shooting death drug seizure christmas shooting Donald Trump, forced isolation unlawful manufacturing hoover alabama concealed carry serial Guy Terrell Junior Malone v State christian guitierez morgan county alabama 28 U.S.C. § 2254 illegal gambling home repair fraud road rage court of criminal appeal releases bomb threat making a murderer tuscaloosa alabama stoves v state lauderdale county alabama eugene lee jones v state constitutional law, identity theft nicholas hawkins the mannequin challenge betton v state negligent homicide adnan syed, breaking and entering hurst mandamus shooting jerry bohannon § 13A-3-23(d) immunity hearing fraudulent checks domestic abuse aziz sayyed theft of property birchfield v north dakota drug possession, alabama supreme court kenneth eugene billups mobile alabama Eutaw Alabama marion county operation bullseye 2016 election, LWOP apprendi v new jersey Etowah County Alabama, OJ Simpson battles v state huntsville alabama criminal justice asia mcclain parole capital offenses florence alabama West Alabama Jefferson County Alabama kimberly alabama anniston alabama, Kareem Dacar Gaymon drug crimes rainbow city alabama New York Times robberies US Supreme Court Update assault aiding and abetting Gardendale Alabama npr benjamin todd acton lethal injection fake kidnapping, underage drinking Mike Hubbard dekalb county alabama prostitution sting mulga alabama moore v texas towles v state south carolina sheffield v state edwards v arizona alabama armed robbery decatur alabama dora alabama alabama law enforcement agency brian fredick lucas Justice Sotomayor hurst v florida albertville alabama sexual assault fraud homicide cherokee county alabama felony assaults limestone county alabama baltimore city circuit court sarah koenig executions OJ Simpson Made in America levins v state alabama criminal law roundup state of arizona fort payne alabama Shonda Walker, kidnapping birmingham alabama madison alabama Benn v State gun control Rule 32 Neil Gorsuch street racing ferguson missouri crime of passion ring v arizona eighth amendment, Pleasant Grove Alabama trussville alabama brookside alabama constitutional violations mccalla alabama morris alabama public assistance fraud fairfield alabama, mountain brook alabama shoplifting heritage christian university Marengo County Alabama Fentanyl department of justice, beylund v north dakota capital punishment avondale alabama Xavier Beasley lethal injection drugs brendan dassey, steve avery, making a murderer, scotus, netflix eric sterling st clair county alabama hoax destructive devices economic growth death penalty Alabaster alabama Lucky D Arcade implied consent abduction church robberies narcotics investigation mike gilotti campbell v state tarrant alabama car accident blountsville alabama § 13A-3-23 Sardis Alabama utah supreme court scotus blount county alabama Easter Ingmire v State texas mount olive alabama self defense warrior alabama Wesley Adam Whitworth minor offenses drug smuggling CCA update Tommy Arthur midazolam gun rights smith v state bessemer alabama baldwin county alabama brady v maryland judicial override embezzlement netflix maryland court of special appeals heflin alabama Glaze v State debtor prison gadsden alabama lamar county hanceville alabama drug trafficking, pelham alabama montgomery alabama strickland v washington calhoun county alabama homicide rate habeas corpus relief arson brendan dassey burglary legende v state abuse second amendment Joshua Reese adger alabama utah v strieff debit card skimming scams domestic violence moving violations criminal justice reform, clarence thomas

Archive

DISCLAIMER

These recoveries and testimonials are not an indication of future results. Every case is different, and regardless of what friends, family, or other individuals may say about what a case is worth, each case must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances as they apply to the law. The valuation of a case depends on the facts, the injuries, the jurisdiction, the venue, the witnesses, the parties, and the testimony, among  other factors. Furthermore, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Get Free Legal Advice  Contact us for a complimentary legal consultation

I am interested in scheduling a free legal consultation and receiving additional information.

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Thank you, your  entry has been  received.

© 2017 The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd, LLC. All Rights Reserved. |

 

As required by Rule 7.2(e), Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.