CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo Because There’s Hope After the Trial


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?




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


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



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.