Summary
U. S. Supreme Court decision rejecting an Alabama murderer's claim that his three state-appointed defense attorneys failed to properly represent him in his sentencing hearing. In 1993, habitual criminal Holly Wood killed his exgirlfriend with a shotgun. At the time, he was on parole for attempting to murder another former girlfriend. Because there was no question regarding Wood's guilt, his defense attorneys considered a mental defense. The evaluation indicated that Wood was slow but no retarded, and it also revealed his inability to control his temper. Because this information could damage the defense, Wood's counsel asked the court to suppress it. Wood was convicted, and, although his counsel argued for mercy, the jury recommended a death sentence. In his appeal, Wood claimed that the psychiatric evidence might have persuaded the jury to sentence him to life. Accepting Alabama's invitation to join the case, CJLF argued that the state court had already decided the claim and reasonably found that the lawyers made a strategic decision to keep out double-edged evidence. The court agreed. [CJLF brief in PDF.]
