Opinion ID: 2519733
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: What investigative steps by trial counsel, if any, would have led to each item of evidence?

Text: Trial counsel could have contacted petitioner's family to develop his background and childhood, including contacting his mother and other relatives either living in the same location or accessible through known family members. Evidence relating to the impact of the juvenile and adult correctional systems could have been developed by obtaining prison records and contacting inmates referenced in those records as well as conducting standard legal research of public records relating to lawsuits involving these institutions. Mental health experts could have been appointed to review the background material and to test petitioner in order to ascertain the viability of psychiatric mitigation. In her findings of fact, the referee explained that appellate counsel utilized standard investigative techniques to obtain the evidence presented at the reference hearing. She categorized the evidence into three general and partially overlapping areasthe circumstances of petitioner's upbringing, the impact of the correctional facilities in Alabama and petitioner's adult experiences, and the psychiatric aspects of petitioner's historynone of which called for any extraordinary efforts beyond simple persistence. In the referee's view, petitioner's attorneys could readily have learned about petitioner's upbringing from their contact with his mother. Other family members and acquaintances could have been found through her; and many were willing to testify on petitioner's behalf. Addresses and information were also independently available from public documents; and counsel could have reached numerous individuals familiar with petitioner's family and upbringing with little effort. [General information regarding schooling issues was available through family members. Many family members and friends continued to live in the Mobile area and others were known to the family.... Several areas of inquiry were available relating to petitioner's experiences in the correctional system in Alabama.... Further, ... the `word' had spread that counsel were looking for people who knew petitioner, and several came forward of their own volition. In the area of mental health, there was no significant written history. The references to family members having mental impairments was not particularly impressive .... [¶] [Nevertheless,] [r]outine appointment of psychiatric experts would have provided some information to dictate any additional steps that may have been in order. The referee further found, however, that [a]ny such inquiry may not necessarily have resulted in the availability of evidence of the diagnoses of organic brain impairment, learning disorders, or of post traumatic stress disorder. The quality of standardized personality tests was not the same, the knowledge of post traumatic stress disorder was in an infancy stage, and the resulting diagnosis may not necessarily have been favorable to the petitioner. [6] Although petitioner's cooperativeness was a significant issue and he had been more forthcoming with appellate counsel than with his trial counsel, the referee found nonetheless that essentially all of the information that was presented [by petitioner at the reference hearing] could have been developed through outside sources in the absence of any cooperation from the petitioner.