525 P.3d 1214
Mont.2023Background
- Aaron Oliphant was convicted by a jury in 2017 of felony aggravated assault of his infant son and sentenced to 20 years (5 years suspended). He did not file a timely appeal.
- Trial counsel J. Mayo Ashley handled the case, allegedly provided limited advocacy (minimal openings/closings, few objections, did not call expert witnesses), and later died; his secretary asserted his health (cancer/treatment) impaired his representation.
- The Montana Innocence Project (MTIP) obtained additional medical records not in Ashley’s file and retained Dr. John Galaznik, whose report offered an alternative interpretation (possible sinus/cortical vein thrombosis and questions about MRI timing) that challenged the State’s timing/causation theory.
- At trial five State medical experts testified that the infant’s injuries were consistent with nonaccidental abusive head trauma (subdural hemorrhages, skull fractures, retinal hemorrhages).
- Oliphant filed a petition for postconviction relief (PCR) and for a new trial more than a year after final judgment, asserting newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC); the District Court denied relief as untimely and concluded Dr. Galaznik’s report was a re‑interpretation, not newly discovered evidence, and that IAC was not shown to be prejudicial.
- The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial; a dissent would have granted discovery and remanded for further proceedings on IAC and discovery because of counsel’s alleged deficient performance and missing records.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Oliphant) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PCR timely under the §46‑21‑102(2) newly‑discovered‑evidence exception | Dr. Galaznik’s expert opinion — based partly on records not in Ashley’s file — is newly discovered and tolled the one‑year limit; counsel’s post‑trial advice and death prevented timely filing | The report is merely a new interpretation of records available at trial or summarized in the record; petition is untimely and no equitable exception applies | Affirmed: petition untimely; Galaznik’s report is reinterpretation, not newly discovered evidence |
| Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance warranting new trial or equitable tolling | Ashley failed to investigate/retain medical experts, failed to present defense experts, made strategic concessions, and gave erroneous post‑trial advice about appeals, causing prejudice | Ashley’s strategic choices were within the range of reasonable professional assistance; petitioner fails to show an available expert or reasonable probability of a different outcome given five State experts | Affirmed: petitioner fails to establish Strickland deficiency or prejudice; no miscarriage‑of‑justice exception |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two‑prong ineffective‑assistance test).
- Kenfield v. State, 384 Mont. 322 (2016) (post‑trial expert analysis of the same evidence is not newly discovered).
- Garding v. State, 400 Mont. 296 (2020) (second‑opinion reinterpretation of trial evidence does not automatically justify a new trial).
- Whitlow v. State, 343 Mont. 90 (2008) (presumption of reasonable professional assistance; later second‑guessing counsel insufficient).
- Elliott v. State, 325 Mont. 345 (2005) (requirements for alleging IAC based on failure to obtain/scientific expert).
- Wilkes v. State, 380 Mont. 388 (2015) (petitioner must identify available experts and expected testimony to support IAC based on failure to call experts).
- Pope v. State, 318 Mont. 383 (2003) (miscarriage‑of‑justice exception reserved for judgments that are a clear nullity where new evidence or glaring error exists).
- Jordan v. State, 338 Mont. 113 (2007) (standard of review for denial of postconviction relief).