In the case, defendant Williamson was reported to have an extensive history of mental illness, including schizophrenia, and bizarre, confused thinking, beginning in adolescence. He had been found incompetent to stand trial but this finding was later reversed in an unrelated bad check charge. He had also received treatment at various mental institutions. According to the record, the attorney did not make a referral for competency evaluation since Williamson had been found competent in the past and knew right from wrong, two invalid reasons for failing to refer for evaluation. Similarly, Tenth Circuit Judge Seymour further criticized counsel's failure to present any evidence of the petitioner's patterns of eating, sleeping and medication compliance, although she also blamed the paucity of funding for attorney and investigator services.
Several questions remain.
The recent execution of Gary Graham in Texas followed a trial that relied on testimony from a single eyewitness and no physical evidence tied to the defendant. Whatever standard is eventually agreed upon, it is clear that suitable investigative resources and training are needed for defenders of indigent clients. Perhaps aspiring defense lawyers should take courses in abnormal psychology, assessment and mental health law and make use of relevant knowledge in the courtroom.