United States Tenth Circuit

Denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in a death penalty case is affirmed in part, but remanded in part for an evidentiary hearing where petitioner's allegations, if true and fully developed, would entitle him to relief as to a claim that he was deprived of effective assistance of counsel because of his trial attorney's failures to engage an expert until shortly before trial, to supply the expert with readily available relevant information, and to present the expert's actual diagnoses to the jury.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/08/2008
• Published 08/11/2008

Judges

• McCONNELL, Circuit Judge, joined by HENRY, Chief Judge, and KELLY, LUCERO, MURPHY, HARTZ, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges., Before HENRY, Chief Judge, TACHA, KELLY, BRISCOE, LUCERO, MURPHY, HARTZ, O'BRIEN, McCONNELL, TYMKOVICH, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Howard A. Pincus, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Denver, CO (Raymond P. Moore, Federal Public Defender, and Lanita B. Henricksen, Henricksen & Henricksen, Oklahoma City, OK, with him on the briefs), for Petitioners Mr. Wilson and Mr. Wackerly.


• For Appellees:
  
• Seth S. Branham, Assistant Attorney General, Oklahoma City, OK (W.A. Drew Edmondson, Attorney General of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, with him on the briefs), for Respondent Mr. Workman.