United States Sixth Circuit

In habeas proceedings arising from petitioner's capital murder conviction, district court's denial of relief is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded where: 1) district court's denial of defendant's Rule 60(b) motion is reversed and remanded with instructions for the district court to first rule on the merits of defendant's remaining ineffective assistance claims, while only addressing the incompetency question if it rejects the ineffective assistance claims on the merits; 2) the case is remanded to conduct defendant's incompetency hearing and decide the merits of his incompetency claim de novo because the Tennessee courts unreasonably applied federal law clearly established by Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399, (1986); and 3) district court's dismissal of defendant's chemical competency claim is affirmed without prejudice to defendant raising a chemical competency claim in the future should he be forcibly medicated.

Appellate Information

• Argued 10/30/2008
• Decided 09/11/2009
• Published 09/11/2009

Judges

• Before SUHRHEINRICH, MOORE and CLAY, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Dana Hansen Chavis, Federal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee, Inc., Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Jennifer Lynn Smith, Office of the Tennessee Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee. ON BRIEF:Dana Hansen Chavis, Federal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee, Inc., Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellant. Jennifer Lynn Smith, Office of the Tennessee Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.