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


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