Conner v. Hall
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13793
11th Cir.2011Background
- Conner, a Georgia death-sentenced inmate, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition.
- He challenges a mental retardation claim under Atkins v. Virginia and seeks discovery and an evidentiary hearing in federal court.
- Georgia law historically barred executing mentally retarded defendants; Fleming v. Zant established a retroactive framework for pre-1988 trials.
- Conner’s first state habeas petition (1984-1997) and second petition (2001) addressed mental retardation under Fleming and Turpin v. Hill; the second petition was deemed successive.
- The district court held Conner procedurally defaulted his mental retardation claim, denying discovery and an evidentiary hearing.
- The Eleventh Circuit vacated and remanded to determine discovery and an evidentiary hearing, holding Georgia’s default rule was inadequately applied and that review is de novo because the claim was not adjudicated on the merits in state court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Georgia’s mental retardation procedural default rule is adequate to bar federal review | Conner argues the rule is inconsistently applied and thus inadequate. | State contends the rule is adequate and consistently applied. | Inadequate to bar federal review; default not adequately dispositive. |
| Whether Conner is entitled to discovery and an evidentiary hearing on his mental retardation claim | Conner seeks discovery of school records and independent mental health evaluation with an evidentiary hearing. | State argues procedural default forecloses relief and limits discovery. | Remand for discovery and an evidentiary hearing consistent with Georgia standards. |
| Whether the district court should rule on the remaining ineffective assistance and prosecutorial misconduct claims after remand | N/A | N/A | Remand of the entire case; those issues need not be decided at this stage. |
Key Cases Cited
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002) (held executing mentally retarded defendants violates the Eighth Amendment)
- Fleming v. Zant, 386 S.E.2d 339 (Ga. 1989) (retroactive application of Georgia ban and framework for MR claims in habeas)
- Turpin v. Hill, 498 S.E.2d 52 (Ga. 1998) (state habeas relief available for MR claims regardless of default)
- Porter v. McCollum, 130 S. Ct. 447 (2010) (review of counsel performance in Strickland context; de novo where merits not adjudicated)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 420 (2000) (reasonable federal review standards for adequacy of evidence; AEDPA standards)
- Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (2011) (limits evidentiary record review in federal habeas proceedings)
- Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (2011) (AEDPA deference guidelines for state-court merit determinations)
- Davis v. Jones, 506 F.3d 1325 (11th Cir. 2007) (AEDPA standard and factual review framework in appeals)
- Schriro v. Landrigan, 550 U.S. 465 (2007) (when an MR claim is undeveloped in state court, de novo review may apply)