Opinion ID: 1844309
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Counsel failed to adequately present evidence of mental retardation.[3]

Text: ¶ 30. Carr claims trial counsel failed to adequately present mitigating evidence of his mental retardation. Ron Lewis, Carr's trial counsel, made an oral motion to the trial court stating that Carr's constitutional rights would be violated under the 8th Amendment and 14th Amendment as well as Article 3, Section 14 and 28 of the Mississippi Constitution if the death penalty was imposed upon him because of his mental retardation. He also proffered the testimony of Dr. William Kallman in order to corroborate Carr's mental retardation. Trial counsel also called Carr's elementary school principal, who described Carr's school attendance, family life, and grades. ¶ 31. Carr's school counselor, Mr. Rencher, also testified to Carr's family life, grades, and standardized test scores. According to Rencher, Carr had very few disciplinary problems at school, and his problems all stemmed from his lack of attendance and his poor grades. ¶ 32. Dr. Kallman was a key witness put on by Carr during his sentencing phase. He testified to his personal evaluation of Carr's mental functioning level and placed Carr in the mildly mentally retarded range. Dr. Kallman stated that it was his opinion that Carr had a serious underlying psychotic condition. Carr I, 655 So.2d at 858. When responding to a question regarding how a person with that level retardation would function in the world at the age of twenty-five he responded, Well, this person would have great difficulty functioning independently in the world unless it was a fairly simple task that did not require a lot of intellectual understanding and activity. ¶ 33. Trial counsel has no duty to present mitigating evidence. Wiley v. State, 517 So.2d 1373, 1379 (Miss.1987). Counsel has a duty to make reasonable investigations or to make a reasonable decision that makes particular investigations unnecessary. Id. Unlike defense counsel in Wiggins, 123 S.Ct. at 2542, who failed to investigate, discover, and present powerful mitigating evidence, Carr's trial counsel put forth significant mitigating evidence during the sentencing phase. We cannot say that trial counsel's decisions were unreasonable in this regard. This assignment of error is without merit.