Opinion ID: 2519733
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: What tactical or financial constraints, if any, weighed against the investigation or presentation of mitigating character and background evidence at the penalty phase?

Text: There were no financial constraints affecting the penalty investigation. The tactical constraints were trial counsel's distaste for the use of inmate witnesses, concern for the consequential development of petitioner's acts of misconduct while incarcerated as well as the preliminary impression that a `poverty-presentation' lacked viability. Also, the petitioner's adamant refusal to have his family involved and his threat to disrupt proceedings if his wishes were not honored impacted on counsel's tactical decisions. The referee found essentially no financial constraints weighing against the investigation or presentation of penalty phase evidence. Regarding tactical constraints, the findings being limited by the absence of Mr. Lenoir's state of mind, Mr. Miller testified that he felt constrained by the adamancy of petitioner's opposition to having his family, and in particular his mother, testify at the trial. Mr. Miller was very consistent in his testimony regarding petitioner's refusal to cooperate in this area, and this position is supported circumstantially by statements made by petitioner as well as testimony from the prosecutor, Ed Ferns. Mr. Miller believed the petitioner when he threatened to be disruptive if these wishes were not accepted. Acceding to these wishes, neither he nor Mr. Lenoir pursued a full investigation of petitioner's background or family and never learned the names of family members with one or two exceptions. In addition, Miller was not particularly impressed with the house or neighborhood in which petitioner grew up as providing a basis for mitigation as it resembled the manner in which counsel had been raised. As to the inherent problems of calling prisoners as witnesses, Mr. Miller stated he was not generally impressed with prisoners and did not want to trade 'good acts' for `bad acts,' expressing concern about the risk of disclosure of any possible misconduct petitioner may have been personally involved in. In fact, the evidence reflected that petitioner engaged in two stabbings and escaped from custodial facilities on two occasions. From a practical standpoint, relating to Mr. Miller's reaction to prisoner-witnesses, the inmates who were called did have substantial violent criminal records and these offenses included a substantial number of escapes. Common themes at that time in penalty presentations included familial abuse, abandonment and institutional witnesses, although the evidence also noted that penalty trials at that time were not generally lengthy. Post traumatic stress disorder remained in its incipient stages and was generally not used at this time except relating to Viet Nam veterans, a sharp contrast with current standards. The evidence further established that both trial attorneys were severely impeded in their efforts to focus on petitioner by their heavy caseloads, conducting back-to-back capital cases before and after petitioner's trial.