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

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

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.