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

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

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.