Skip navigation
× You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.

Supreme Court Grants Habeas for Defense Counsel's Failure to Investigate Mitigating Circumstance in Murder Case

Supreme Court Grants Habeas for Defense Counsel's Failure to Investigate Mitigating Circumstance in Murder Case

On November 30, 2009 U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Florida Supreme Court decision that discounted Counsel's failure to conduct a thorough post-conviction investigation to establish statutory mitigating circumstance.

George Porter, a wounded and decorated Korean veteran, was traumatized in combat. He was convicted and sentenced to death for the first-degree murders of his ex-girlfriend and her boyfriend, Walter Burrows. With standby counsel present, Porter represented himself through most of the pretrial and the beginning of the trial. Before the State rested, he plead guilty and the standby counsel was appointed as counsel for the penalty phase. The defense used Porter's ex-wife to establish his behavior when intoxicated. Counsel had a month to investigate and only had one short meeting with him. The attorney failed to check his school, medical, or service records.

In 1995, Porter petitioned for post-conviction relief, claiming his counsel failed to investigate and present mitigating evidence. During the two-day evidentiary hearing, Porter presented evidence of child abuse, military heroics and the resulting trauma, and long-term substance abuse. He also presented expert testimony about his brain damage that substantially impaired his brain. The trial court ruled that counsel's failure did not prejudice the post-conviction outcome. Porter appealed and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed. He filed a federal habeas petition.

District court granted Porter's writ of habeas corpus Sixth Amendment violation for ineffective counsel. The 11th Circuit reversed and the Florida Supreme Court affirmed. Porter petitioned for writ of Ceriorari.

U.S. Supreme court stated that Porter's counsel failed to interview witnesses or request record. The failure dehumanized Porter and did not allow the jury and the judge to accurately gauge his moral culpability. Since Porter presented sufficient evidence that would have undermined the outcome of the sentencing phase, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the writ of Certiorari in part and reversed in the Court of Appeals ruling.

See: Porter v. McCollum, 558 U.S. ____ (2009).

 

As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login

Related legal case

Porter v. McCollum