Opinion ID: 781059
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Walton's counsel rendered ineffective assistance:

Text: (A) Regarding Walton's mental health: 1 Counsel unreasonably failed to ensure that a proper competency evaluation was conducted; 2 Counsel unreasonably failed to ensure that a competency hearing was held; 3 Counsel unreasonably failed to ensure that a competency finding was made by the state trial court; 4 Counsel unreasonably failed to adequately investigate and present all information relevant to Walton's competency; 5 Counsel unreasonably failed to adequately investigate and present all necessary and relevant information regarding the knowing, voluntary, and intelligent nature of Walton's guilty plea and to ensure that the state trial court conducted a proper colloquy; 6 Counsel unreasonably failed to adequately investigate and present all necessary and relevant information regarding Walton's mental state at the time of the crime; 7 Counsel unreasonably failed to adequately investigate and present all necessary and relevant information regarding Walton's mental state during the sentencing phase; 8 Counsel unreasonably failed to ensure that Walton's rights to access to a psychiatrist under Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 105 S.Ct. 1087, 84 L.Ed.2d 53 (1985), were appropriately asserted and afforded; 9 Counsel unreasonably failed to adequately advise Walton regarding his guilty plea; and 10 Counsel unreasonably failed to move to withdraw Walton's guilty pleas; (B) In other respects at trial: 1 Counsel unreasonably failed to effectively cross-examine Lacy Johnson; 2 Counsel unreasonably failed to protect Walton's Sixth Amendment rights under Massiah; 3 Counsel unreasonably stipulated to evidence in the Commonwealth's proffer; and 4 Counsel unreasonably failed to object to the prosecutor's inappropriate redirect examination of Lacy Johnson (C) On appeal.