Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 197

36 

PORTER  v.  McCOLLUM 

Per Curiam 

tually removed all of the knives from the house.  According 
to  Porter’s  brother,  Porter  developed  a  serious  drinking 
problem  and  began  drinking  so  heavily  that  he  would  get 
into ﬁghts and not remember them at all. 

In  addition  to  this  testimony  regarding  his  life  history, 
Porter presented an expert in neuropsychology, Dr. Dee, who 
had examined Porter and administered a number of psycho­
logical assessments.  Dr. Dee concluded that Porter suffered 
from  brain damage  that could  manifest in  impulsive, violent 
behavior.  At the time of the crime, Dr. Dee testiﬁed, Porter 
was substantially impaired in his ability to conform his con­
duct to the law and suffered from an extreme mental or emo­
tional  disturbance,  two  statutory  mitigating  circumstances, 
Fla. Stat. § 921.141(6).  Dr. Dee also testiﬁed that Porter had 
substantial  difﬁculties  with  reading,  writing,  and  memory, 
and  that  these  cognitive  defects  were  present  when  he  was 
evaluated for competency to stand trial.  2 Tr. 227–228 (Jan. 
5, 1996); see also Record 904–906.  Although the State’s ex­
perts  reached  different  conclusions  regarding  the  statutory 
mitigators,5  each  expert  testiﬁed  that  he  could  not  diagnose 
Porter or rule out a brain abnormality.  2 Tr. 345, 382 (Jan. 
5, 1996); 3 id., at 405. 

The  trial  judge  who  conducted  the  state  postconviction 
hearing,  without  determining  counsel’s  deﬁciency,  held  that 
Porter  had  not  been  prejudiced  by  the  failure  to  introduce 
any  of  that  evidence.  Record  1203,  1206.  He  found  that 
Porter  had  failed  to  establish  any  statutory  mitigating  cir­
cumstances,  id.,  at  1207,  and  that  the  nonstatutory  mitigat­
ing  evidence  would  not  have  made  a  difference  in  the  out­

erans  Affairs  (VA),  reporting  that  approximately  23%  of  the  Iraq  and 
Afghanistan war veterans seeking treatment at a VA medical facility had 
been preliminarily diagnosed with PTSD). 

5 The  State  presented  two  experts,  Dr.  Riebsame  and  Dr.  Kirkland. 
Neither  of  the  State’s  experts  had  examined  Porter,  but  each  testiﬁed 
that  based  upon  their  review  of  the  record,  Porter  met  neither  statutory 
mitigating circumstance.