In Jefferson v. Hall, No. 07-12502 (June 12, 2009), the Court (2-1, Carnes, J. dissenting) reversed the grant of habeas relief to a Georgia inmate sentenced to death for a 1985 murder.
The Court found that counsel had not given ineffective assistance at the penalty phase of the trial. Jefferson claimed that counsel failed to present evidence of his claimed organic brain damage.
The Court noted that "strategic decisions" of counsel are reviewed deferentially: no relief can be granted on ineffectiveness grounds unless it is shown that "no reasonable lawyer" would have so acted in the circumstances. The Court noted that with hindsight, it could always be said that trial counsel "could have done something different." But ineffectiveness unless redresses what was "constitutionally compelled."
The Court found no ineffectiveness in counsel’s decision to pursue an innocence strategy, noting that their psychologist expert testified that he told counsel it would be a waste of time to investigate brain damage.
[Carnes, J., dissenting, pointed out that the residual doubt defense presented at the penalty phase was not inconsistent with the evidence of brain damage which defense counsel failed to investigate.]
