26 June 2017 :

The United States Supreme Court has ruled 5-4 in favor of Alabama death-row prisoner James McWilliams, 60, Black, in his claim that he was unconstitutionally sentenced to death when Alabama refused to provide him an independent mental health expert to assist in the preparation and presentation of his case. The case is McWilliams v. Dunn. In 1986 James McWilliams was convicted of the rape and murder of the 1984 rape and murder of Patricia Reynolds. His guilt regarding was not much debated – eyewitnesses saw him at the scene of the crime, and he was caught driving a stolen car with the murder weapon. The defense had no expert to help it prepare to examine the doctors who testified for the state, and only presented testimony about his mental condition from McWilliams and his mother. After the jury voted 10-2 to recommend the death penalty, the court scheduled a formal sentencing hearing and appointed a state neuropsychologist to examine McWilliams. That doctor prepared a report of the evaluation and consulted with the prosecution. Defense counsel received the neuropsychological report—which stated that McWilliams had “organic brain damage,” “genuine neuropsychological problems,” and “an obvious neuropsychological deficit”—only two days before his sentencing hearing. On the day of the hearing, counsel received extensive prison mental health records that contained evidence that McWilliams was being prescribed anti-psychotic medication. After denying the defense time to consult with an independent expert to develop the mental health evidence for use in mitigation, the court found no mitigating evidence and on Oct. 9, 1986 sentenced McWilliams to death. The Court remanded the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, which must now determine whether Alabama's violation of McWilliams' right to an independent expert had the "'substantial and injurious effect or influence' required to warrant a grant of habeas relief."