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

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

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.