Taylor v. State
2011 Del. LEXIS 573
Del.2011Background
- Milton Taylor was convicted of First Degree Murder and sentenced to death after a March 2001 trial.
- Taylor wrote a confession note; trial court denied suppression of that note.
- During the penalty phase, Taylor waived presenting mitigating evidence; only some lay witnesses testified.
- Postconviction counsel obtained new expert testimony (Dougherty and Mack) alleging brain damage, ADHD, and personality disorders.
- Superior Court denied Rule 61 postconviction relief in 2010; Taylor timely appeals, including a challenge to a material witness warrant for his mother.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failure to investigate | Taylor argues trial counsel failed to uncover mitigating evidence and mental-health leads. | Taylor contends counsel's investigation was deficient and prejudicial, violating Strickland. | No reversible prejudice; counsel's investigation was reasonable under Strickland. |
| Ineffective assistance for failures to object | Taylor claims trial counsel should have objected to penalty-phase evidence, non-jury-found evidence, prosecutor comments, and anti-sympathy instruction. | Taylor argues objections would have altered outcome; counsel's conduct was unreasonable. | Objections either not required or not prejudicial; no relief for these claims. |
| Fundamental fairness and other constitutional claims | Taylor invokes several constitutional challenges (waiver of mitigation, Gardner issue, Estelle issue, prosecutor remarks, anti-sympathy instruction). | These claims lack colorable basis or are procedurally defaulted. | Claims procedurally barred or not colorable; no relief. |
| Material witness warrant | Taylor sought a warrant to compel his mother's testimony; argued her testimony was helpful. | Motion was waived by failure to show material help; no abuse of discretion. | Waived; decision not reviewable on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes two-prong standard for ineffective assistance)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (U.S. 2000) (mitigation investigation not adequately framed by state standards)
- Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (U.S. 2003) (importance of comprehensive investigation under prevailing standards)
- Rompilla v. Beard, 545 U.S. 374 (U.S. 2005) (duty to review potentially mitigating records; failure to do so prejudicial)
- Gardner v. Florida, 430 U.S. 651 (U.S. 1977) (due process concern with undisclosed mitigation materials)
- Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454 (U.S. 1981) (psychiatrist's testimony about dangerousness and Fifth Amendment concerns)
- California v. Brown, 479 U.S. 538 (U.S. 1987) (anti-sympathy instruction constitutional status)
- Lesko v. Lehman, 925 F.2d 1527 (3d Cir. 1991) (limits on prosecutorial/commentary response to remorse evidence)