Humphrey v. Nance
293 Ga. 189
| Ga. | 2013Background
- Nance was convicted in 1997 of malice murder, felony murder, armed robbery-related offenses, and possession of a firearm during a felony, and initially sentenced to death.
- This Court on direct appeal affirmed the convictions but reversed the death sentence and remanded for resentencing due to a juror qualification issue.
- In 2002, Nance was resentenced to death, and this Court again affirmed the death sentence.
- Nance filed a habeas corpus petition in 2007, amended in 2008; an evidentiary hearing was held in 2008.
- The habeas court denied relief on the convictions but vacated the death sentence, finding prejudicial deficiencies in trial counsel’s presentation of mitigation at resentencing.
- The Warden appealed the vacatur of the death sentence, and Nance cross-appealed seeking relief regarding the malice murder conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was trial counsel ineffective for omitting Shaffer testimony at the 2002 resentencing? | Nance | Nance | No reversible prejudice; strategic choice, evidence difference not outcome-determinative |
| Was trial counsel's omission of brain-damage evidence at resentencing principled and non-prejudicial? | Nance | Nance | Omission was a strategic decision; insufficient prejudice to alter result |
| Did omission of Hutchinson's testimony at the guilty/innocence phase prejudice Nance? | Nance | Nance | Not prejudicial; strategic decisions and existing evidence supported defense theory |
| Did failure to present Hutchinson at resentencing undermine mitigation and prejudice the outcome? | Nance | Nance | No reasonable probability of different outcome; evidence largely cumulative |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (2003) (investigation into mitigation evidence must be reasonable)
- Hall v. Lee, 286 Ga. 79 (2009) (reiterates reasonable defense strategy in mitigation)
- Chandler v. United States, 218 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2000) (defense strategy decisions are not deficient per se)
- Jefferson v. Zant, 263 Ga. 316 (1993) (strickland-based review for trial counsel effectiveness in Georgia)
- Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809 (2007) (lack of prejudice where mitigation is cumulative)
- Martinez v. Dretke, 404 F.3d 878 (5th Cir. 2005) (trial strategy governs presenting or omitting evidence)