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


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



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.