534 F. App'x 406
6th Cir.2013Background
- In April 2000 Reginald Walker shot and killed Larry Troup in a store; Walker admitted the killing and was convicted of first-degree murder and a felony-firearm offense in 2001 and sentenced to life without parole plus two years.
- Walker had a long, documented history of severe mental illness (diagnoses including schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder, hospitalizations, psychosis, hallucinations, irregular antipsychotic use, Social Security disability, and a court-appointed guardian).
- Defense counsel declined to present an insanity defense at trial, instead pursuing accident/self-defense/intoxication; the trial psychiatric examiner (Dr. Fields) had found Walker criminally responsible.
- On direct appeal the Michigan Court of Appeals held counsel’s failure to investigate an insanity defense was deficient and ordered a Ginther evidentiary hearing; after that hearing the trial court found no prejudice and the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed in 2005.
- Walker filed a federal habeas petition alleging ineffective assistance under Strickland; the district court denied relief, this Court originally granted the writ, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of Parker v. Matthews, and on reconsideration the Sixth Circuit again grants the writ and orders release unless the state retrials within 180 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel’s failure to investigate/present an insanity defense constituted deficient performance and caused Strickland prejudice | Walker: Counsel performed deficiently by not investigating/presenting insanity given extensive, well-documented history; reasonable probability of a different outcome (e.g., guilty but mentally ill, hung jury, undermined confidence) | State: Even if performance was deficient, Walker was not prejudiced because an insanity defense was not meritorious and there was no reasonable probability of a favorable different result | Court: Counsel’s failure was deficient (state court already found so); the Michigan Court of Appeals unreasonably applied Strickland on prejudice and relief is warranted — habeas granted unless retrial within 180 days |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part ineffective-assistance test: deficiency + prejudice)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000) (AEDPA unreasonableness standard; federal court cannot grant habeas merely because it disagrees)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (state-court decisions entitled to deference; unreasonableness standard explained)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence; deference to jury fact-findings)
- Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012) (reasonable-probability definition of Strickland prejudice)
- Woodford v. Visciotti, 537 U.S. 19 (2002) (explaining Strickland’s reasonable-probability standard undermines confidence)
- Porter v. McCollum, 558 U.S. 30 (2009) (granting Strickland relief where counsel failed to present mitigating evidence)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995) (materiality and undermining confidence in outcome)
- Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364 (1993) (prejudice defined by effect on fairness and reliability)
- Parker v. Matthews, 567 U.S. 37 (2012) (Supreme Court clarified limits on circuit precedent and stressed deference to reasonable state-court rulings)