Colleen Mary Rohan v. Jill Brown
3:88-cv-02779
N.D. Cal.Sep 30, 2020Background
- Oscar Gates was convicted in 1981 of first-degree murder with a robbery-murder special circumstance and sentenced to death; convictions were affirmed on direct appeal.
- Gates alleges longstanding serious mental illness (delusional/paranoid disorder), a history of head trauma and toxic exposure, prior findings of legal insanity (1973) and multiple subsequent competency findings in federal habeas proceedings.
- Key habeas claims at issue: Claim 3A (tried while incompetent), Claim 4A (waiver of Fifth Amendment invalid due to incompetence), related ineffective-assistance claims (2B, 3B, 4B) alleging counsel failed to investigate competency, Claim 8D (counsel ineffective for failing to investigate/introduce evidence about the "Stevenson" forgery ring), and Claim 34 (present insanity as bar to execution).
- The court applied pre-AEDPA standards (petition filed pre-AEDPA), allowing broader fact development and a lower threshold for an evidentiary hearing than under AEDPA.
- The court found Gates presented specific, corroborated evidence creating a substantial doubt about competence at trial (expert declarations, contemporaneous 1973 findings, and declarations by trial/appellate counsel) and therefore granted an evidentiary hearing on the competency-related claims (2B, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B).
- The court denied an evidentiary hearing on Claim 8D (Stevenson ring) for lack of a colorable prejudice showing and on Claim 34 (present insanity) as not ripe; Claim 2A (challenge to experts' performance) remained barred by Teague.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competence to stand trial (Claim 3A) | Gates says evidence (life history, expert opinions, prior insanity findings, attorney observations) raises a substantial doubt he was competent at trial. | Warden points to contemporaneous expert evaluations, Gates’s coherent trial testimony, and counsel’s failure to raise competence at trial. | Court: Granted evidentiary hearing; Gates met low pre-AEDPA threshold showing specific facts creating substantial doubt about competence at trial. |
| Validity of waiver/testimony (Claim 4A) | Waiver of Fifth and decision to testify were not knowing/voluntary because Gates was incompetent. | Warden emphasizes Gates’s trial testimony and lack of contemporaneous competency challenge. | Court: Granted evidentiary hearing (tied to competence findings). |
| Ineffective assistance re competency (Claims 2B, 3B, 4B) | Counsel failed to adequately investigate mental illness, failed to provide experts needed information, and failed to ask for competency inquiry. | Warden notes counsel obtained psychological evaluations and did not contemporaneously challenge competence. | Court: Granted evidentiary hearing to develop facts on counsel’s investigation and decisions. |
| Failure to investigate/prove Stevenson forgery ring (Claim 8D) | Counsel should have discovered public records and law-enforcement sources proving the forgery ring, which would have impeached prosecution witnesses and avoided Gates testifying. | Warden: trial record shows court excluded much such evidence; many contested items were admitted or elicited via rebuttal; prejudice is speculative. | Court: Denied hearing — petitioner failed to show a colorable claim of prejudice given evidentiary rulings, rebuttal testimony, and lack of specific pleadings showing a reasonable probability of a different outcome. |
| Present insanity requiring vacatur of death sentence (Claim 34) | Gates contends Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments bar execution if presently insane; requests hearing when execution is imminent. | Warden: claim not ripe now; should be dismissed without prejudice to permit final judgment. | Court: Denied hearing as not ripe; deferred decision on dismissal without prejudice until final judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (2011) (limits federal habeas review record under AEDPA to the state-court record)
- Clark v. Chappell, 936 F.3d 944 (9th Cir. 2019) (pre-AEDPA standard for entitlement to an evidentiary hearing)
- Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (1975) (due process forbids trying an incompetent defendant)
- Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960) (standard for competence to stand trial)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (ineffective assistance prejudice standard)
- Williams v. Woodford, 384 F.3d 567 (9th Cir. 2004) (retrospective competency evidence and weight of contemporaneous records)
- Boag v. Raines, 769 F.2d 1341 (9th Cir. 1985) (habeas evidentiary hearing warranted where petitioner shows substantial evidence of incompetence)
- Sully v. Ayers, 725 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2013) (retrospective incompetency claims are disfavored; competence inquiry standards)
- Earp v. Ornoski, 431 F.3d 1158 (9th Cir. 2005) (characterizing the pre-AEDPA evidentiary-hearing standard as a low bar)