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


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



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.