Opinion ID: 1753481
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Penalty Phase Relief

Text: During the penalty phase, Glass' trial counsel called ten witnesses to provide mitigation evidence. These witnesses included Glass' family members, friends, and former employers and co-workers. Glass alleges that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and present additional testimony from former teachers and other professionals. The motion court agreed, finding that trial counsel's failure to investigate and call school officials and prior professionals was deficient and prejudicial since jurors perceive non-family members as more `disinterested' witnesses. To prove ineffective assistance for failure to call a witness, the defendant must show that: (1) trial counsel knew or should have known of the existence of the witness; (2) the witness could be located through reasonable investigation; (3) the witness would testify; and (4) the witness's testimony would have produced a viable defense. Hutchison v. State, 150 S.W.3d 292, 304 (Mo. banc 2004). Prevailing professional standards for capital defense work require counsel to discover all reasonably available mitigating evidence . . . Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 524, 123 S.Ct. 2527, 156 L.Ed.2d 471 (2003). This includes medical history, educational history, employment and training history, family and social history, prior adult and juvenile correctional experience, and religious and cultural influences. Id. Virtually no limits are placed on the relevant mitigating evidence a capital defendant may introduce concerning his own circumstances. Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808, 822, 111 S.Ct. 2597, 115 L.Ed.2d 720 (1991) (quoting Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104, 114, 102 S.Ct. 869, 71 L.Ed.2d 1 (1982)).