368 P.3d 707
Mont.2016Background
- On Jan. 25, 2009, after drinking with Justin Wells, Heavygun and Wells fought; Wells later was found on Heavygun’s porch and died from stab wounds. Heavygun had a cut on his thumb and a .07 BAC sample the next morning.
- Heavygun was arrested following a traffic crash shortly after leaving the scene; he made statements suggesting culpability and asked for an attorney.
- At trial Heavygun asserted justifiable use of force, testifying he disarmed Wells and stabbed to stop an attack; blood evidence inside his home and other facts undermined parts of that account.
- A jury convicted Heavygun of deliberate homicide and multiple related offenses; this Court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal but left ineffective-assistance claims to postconviction proceedings.
- Heavygun petitioned for postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance based on: multiple counsel, failure to investigate Wells’ violent history, and inadequate preparation to testify. The district court denied relief; the Montana Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did representation by multiple attorneys constitute ineffective assistance? | Heavygun: six OPD attorneys created a “revolving door,” preventing an attorney-client relationship and violating OPD standards. | State: primary representation was by two attorneys; substitutions for routine hearings are common and reasonable. | Court: No deficiency — multiple counsel did not fall below objective reasonableness. |
| Did counsel fail to investigate and present evidence of victim’s violent history? | Heavygun: Spencer did not interview or call witnesses who could prove Wells’ propensity for violence, key to self‑defense. | State: trial counsel reasonably limited investigation to what Heavygun knew; Heavygun testified prior violence was not on his mind, making additional evidence likely inadmissible. | Court: No prejudice — further investigation would not have altered outcome because Heavygun disclaimed reliance on Wells’ prior violence. |
| Did counsel inadequately prepare Heavygun to testify? | Heavygun: Spencer’s preparation was insufficient, causing harmful testimony (e.g., admitting prior violence wasn’t on his mind). | State: Spencer extensively prepared Heavygun (multiple meetings, written outlines, 340+ hours by OPD); inconsistencies resulted from Heavygun changing his story. | Court: No deficiency or prejudice — preparation was extensive; Heavygun’s testimony failures were his own. |
| Does cumulative error require relief? | Heavygun: combined defects deprived him of effective counsel. | State: because individual claims fail, cumulative-error argument fails. | Court: No cumulative error; overall claim fails. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishing two‑prong ineffective-assistance test)
- DeSchon v. State, 347 Mont. 30 (discussing counsel’s duty to investigate and limits of admissible character evidence)
- Sartain v. State, 365 Mont. 483 (applying Strickland standard)
- Riggs v. State, 362 Mont. 140 (denying relief where attorney’s preparation was substantial and defendant did not show prejudice)
- State v. Sattler, 288 Mont. 79 (admissibility of victim character evidence under M. R. Evid. 405(b))
- State v. Heavygun, 360 Mont. 413 (prior direct-appeal decision affirming convictions)