Opinion ID: 1401004
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Lack of an Affidavit from Counsel

Text: In dissent, Judge Tymkovich argues that it is impossible to determine that counsel knew or should have known further investigation was necessary, or that counsel's late hiring of the expert prejudiced the investigation, because we lack an affidavit from counsel that sheds any light on these issues. Diss. Op. 1132. According to the dissent [t]he absence of any admissions in counsel's affidavit to errors at trial stands in stark contrast to other death-penalty appeals in which counsel confesses his performance was deficient. Id. at 1132 n. 7. There is no support for the proposition that the absence of an affidavit from trial counsel is fatal to a habeas petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance. See Barkell v. Crouse, 468 F.3d 684 (10th Cir. 2006) (remanding for an evidentiary hearing without an affidavit from counsel); Sallahdin v. Gibson, 275 F.3d 1211, 1240 & n. 11 (10th Cir.2002) (remanding for an evidentiary hearing so that counsel could testify as to his reasons, or lack thereof, for not presenting the expert, as the affidavit submitted was extremely vague.). There is often a conflict of interest between client and counsel on this question. If trial counsel confesses to deficient performance, he may face court sanctions such as fees or removal from the court appointed attorney list. Even if counsel does not receive some court-induced punishment, his reputation will certainly be impugned, which may in turn affect his practice. A requirement that the defendant receive a full confession of deficiency, in writing, from trial counsel puts the defendant at the mercy of his lawyer. If more information from trial counsel is necessary to resolve particular issues, which the State here does not contend, the court may subpoena him at the evidentiary hearing. In any event, an affidavit from trial counsel is unnecessary here. While the record lacks a statement from Wilson's counsel that he did not have enough time to obtain a further diagnosis, diss. op. 1132, Dr. Reynolds' affidavit provides us with that information. Moreover, the undiscovered witnesses in this case were Mr. Wilson's immediate family members  the most obvious of resources. We do not need an affidavit from trial counsel informing us that he was aware he had incomplete information, as even the most inexperienced trial counsel knows that an investigation cannot be complete without talking to the immediate family.