Stevens v. McBride, 05-1442 (7^th Cir., June 18, 2007)

In a splintered habeas decision, a divided panel of the Seventh Circuit orders a new sentencing hearing for Indiana death row inmate Christopher Stevens, who was convicted of molesting and brutally murdering a 10-year old. Stevens himself had been abused and raped as a child, and the defense intended to use his history of mental health problems as mitigating evidence to convince the jury to save his life. To do that, the defense team needed to hire an expert. They chose Dr. Lawrence Lennon, who focused on adolescent psychiatry.

Dr. Lennon wrote an extremely damaging report, in which he described Stevens as cold and calculating, opined that he showed no remorse for his actions and instead blamed others, and concluded that he would likely molest again if he had the opportunity. When the defense team questioned Dr. Lennon about why his report was so unfavorable, he told them not to worry, and assured them that the report was designed to “sandbag” the prosecution. Shortly thereafter, the defense team learned that Dr. Lennon was a rare breed of psychiatrist indeed, as he believed that mental disorders were “a myth.” Dr. Lennon’s favored therapeutic technique was putting teenage boys on his lap and nursing them from a bottle.

Perhaps all this should have given the defense team pause about putting Dr. Lennon in front of the jury. But no. The defense did not bother to have Stevens examined by any other mental health professional. During the sentencing phase, the defense called Dr. Lennon as its only expert witness. Dr. Lennon’s testimony did nothing to help Stevens, and on cross examination, the prosecution was able to use his report practically verbatim. And as if to seal Stevens’ fate, Dr. Lennon testified about some gruesome details that Stevens had admitted to him, details he had not shared with the defense team. The jury recommended the death penalty.

Perhaps Dr. Lennon’s performance in front of the jury should have given the defense team pause about using Dr. Lennon at the sentencing hearing. But no. The defense again called Dr. Lennon, who told the trial judge that Stevens was “a great risk to society.” The judge accepted the jury’s recommended and sentenced Stevens to death.

The majority of Judges Wood and Ripple concludes that calling Dr. Lennon not once but twice amounts to ineffective assistance of counsel. Accordingly, it orders the state to resentence him. On the other hand, the majority of Judges Wood and Manion rejects Stevens’ argument that he should also get a new guilt phase trial. Judge Ripple dissents from this portion of the decision, arguing that Stevens’ attorneys inexplicably failed to pursue a mental illness defense. He’d grant Stevens an entirely new trial. Finally, in a partial dissent, Judge Manion explains that he would not grant Stevens habeas relief at all.

Posted Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:51:07 and filed under Sixth Amendment, Sentencing, Death Penalty, AEDPA, Decision of the Day. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.