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

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

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.