Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Capital Defense Weekly

Criminal Law

: Capital Defense Weekly

this week’s edition is up

By Karl R. Keys, Esq.

This week’s edition is available here. Leading off this week are two decisions, the Florida Supreme Court’s Timothy Lee Hurst v. State and the Ninth Circuit’s Michael Allen Hamilton v. Ayers.  In both cases the outcome is the same, a new sentencing hearing ordered.  The cause for both courts’ actions is likewise the same, inadequate representation in the penalty phase of their respective trials for failing to to adequately investigate and present mitigatory evidence.  A passage from Hamilton sums up both cases, although an equally poignant passage from Hurst could be used: Hamilton was constitutionally entitled to effective representation at the penalty phase of his capital trial, but he did not receive it. His counsel failed to investigate a substantial amount of available mitigating evidence concerning Hamilton?s horrific childhood and mental illness, and thus could not possibly have made a strategic decision as to a mitigation defense...continue to full post

Full post as published by Capital Defense Weekly on September 21, 2009 (boomark / email).