Post by SoulTrainOz on Jul 7, 2006 0:13:01 GMT -5
offered post-trial plea deal
A man on death row for nearly two decades must be offered a post-trial plea deal that would effectively take the death penalty off the table, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.
Maxwell Alton Hoffman was sentenced to death in 1989 for the revenge slaying of Denise Williams, a police drug informant.
Like most capital punishment cases, Hoffman's case has been in and out of the appellate courts since his conviction. But in a ruling handed down Wednesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the state must either release him or again offer him a plea deal he originally turned down - allowing him to plead guilty in exchange for prosecutors no longer seeking the death penalty.
"It should end the case, assuming the state steps up and we're able to put Max in a position where he's able to consider the consequences and accept the plea deal," said Hoffman's attorney, Joan Fisher with the Federal Defenders of Eastern Washington and Idaho. "But it's not final. I have not yet heard from the state and they could certainly petition for a rehearing."
Ellison Matthews, the Boise-based attorney representing the state, could not immediately be reached for comment by The Associated Press.
The case began in 1988, when the 28-year-old Williams served as a police informant while buying drugs from Richard Holmes, leading to his arrest. After Holmes was released on bail, he had Williams brought to a campsite where he, Hoffman and a man named Ron Wages were waiting.
Holmes left Williams with the two men, telling them, "You know what to do," according to court documents. Hoffman slit Williams' throat, Wages stabbed her and both men tried to bury her with rocks.
All 3 men were charged in the murder. Wages pleaded guilty in exchange for life in prison, and Holmes also avoided the death penalty by agreeing to tell authorities where Williams' body was, though he was killed in a prison riot before Hoffman's trial.
Hoffman, however, refused to plead guilty on the advice of his attorneys, even though prosecutors told him that if he refused the plea deal they would seek the death penalty. One of Hoffman's attorneys - William Wellman - told Hoffman he believed that a recent appellate court ruling out of Arizona showed that Idaho's similar death penalty scheme was unconstitutional, and that it was only a matter of time before Idaho's death penalty scheme would be overturned in court.
But Idaho's death penalty scheme wasn't immediately overturned, and on June 9, 1989, Hoffman was sentenced to death.
He appealed the conviction, claiming his attorneys were incompetent because they failed to investigate whether he had the capacity to form the intent for murder, whether he was competent to stand trial, and because they were wrong in recommending that he accept the plea bargain.
Indeed, the 9th Circuit panel found that Hoffman is borderline retarded, had used drugs the day of the murder and likely suffers from mental problems that the attorneys should have investigated as a possible defense, but the court also found that even with that defense a jury would have convicted him of the crime. The plea bargain recommendation, however, was a clear example of ineffective counsel, the court found.
The attorneys failed to take into account the likelihood that the Arizona ruling over death penalty cases would be appealed, the court found.
"We do not expect counsel to be prescient about the direction the law will take," Judge Harry Pregerson wrote for the 3-judge panel. "We nonetheless find that Wellman's representation of Hoffman during the plea bargaining stage was deficient for 2 reasons: first, Wellman based his advice on incomplete research, and second, Wellman recommended that his client risk much in exchange for very little."
That error, combined with Hoffman's compliant personality, meant that he was harmed by the attorney's recommendation, the court found.
"Accordingly, we order the district court to direct the state to release Hoffman unless, within a reasonable time from the date of this opinion, the state offers Hoffman a plea agreement with the 'same material terms' offered in the original agreement," the 9th circuit ruled.
The ruling highlights the need for competent attorneys in capital
punishment cases, Fisher said. "While I think the state has made some efforts to improve the quality of counsel, I think they're far short. The type of counsel they need for Idaho is an actual capital attorney unit," she said. "When you depend on the local public defenders it's impossible for them to have the resources or keep up on the law."
(source: The Associated Press)
A man on death row for nearly two decades must be offered a post-trial plea deal that would effectively take the death penalty off the table, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.
Maxwell Alton Hoffman was sentenced to death in 1989 for the revenge slaying of Denise Williams, a police drug informant.
Like most capital punishment cases, Hoffman's case has been in and out of the appellate courts since his conviction. But in a ruling handed down Wednesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the state must either release him or again offer him a plea deal he originally turned down - allowing him to plead guilty in exchange for prosecutors no longer seeking the death penalty.
"It should end the case, assuming the state steps up and we're able to put Max in a position where he's able to consider the consequences and accept the plea deal," said Hoffman's attorney, Joan Fisher with the Federal Defenders of Eastern Washington and Idaho. "But it's not final. I have not yet heard from the state and they could certainly petition for a rehearing."
Ellison Matthews, the Boise-based attorney representing the state, could not immediately be reached for comment by The Associated Press.
The case began in 1988, when the 28-year-old Williams served as a police informant while buying drugs from Richard Holmes, leading to his arrest. After Holmes was released on bail, he had Williams brought to a campsite where he, Hoffman and a man named Ron Wages were waiting.
Holmes left Williams with the two men, telling them, "You know what to do," according to court documents. Hoffman slit Williams' throat, Wages stabbed her and both men tried to bury her with rocks.
All 3 men were charged in the murder. Wages pleaded guilty in exchange for life in prison, and Holmes also avoided the death penalty by agreeing to tell authorities where Williams' body was, though he was killed in a prison riot before Hoffman's trial.
Hoffman, however, refused to plead guilty on the advice of his attorneys, even though prosecutors told him that if he refused the plea deal they would seek the death penalty. One of Hoffman's attorneys - William Wellman - told Hoffman he believed that a recent appellate court ruling out of Arizona showed that Idaho's similar death penalty scheme was unconstitutional, and that it was only a matter of time before Idaho's death penalty scheme would be overturned in court.
But Idaho's death penalty scheme wasn't immediately overturned, and on June 9, 1989, Hoffman was sentenced to death.
He appealed the conviction, claiming his attorneys were incompetent because they failed to investigate whether he had the capacity to form the intent for murder, whether he was competent to stand trial, and because they were wrong in recommending that he accept the plea bargain.
Indeed, the 9th Circuit panel found that Hoffman is borderline retarded, had used drugs the day of the murder and likely suffers from mental problems that the attorneys should have investigated as a possible defense, but the court also found that even with that defense a jury would have convicted him of the crime. The plea bargain recommendation, however, was a clear example of ineffective counsel, the court found.
The attorneys failed to take into account the likelihood that the Arizona ruling over death penalty cases would be appealed, the court found.
"We do not expect counsel to be prescient about the direction the law will take," Judge Harry Pregerson wrote for the 3-judge panel. "We nonetheless find that Wellman's representation of Hoffman during the plea bargaining stage was deficient for 2 reasons: first, Wellman based his advice on incomplete research, and second, Wellman recommended that his client risk much in exchange for very little."
That error, combined with Hoffman's compliant personality, meant that he was harmed by the attorney's recommendation, the court found.
"Accordingly, we order the district court to direct the state to release Hoffman unless, within a reasonable time from the date of this opinion, the state offers Hoffman a plea agreement with the 'same material terms' offered in the original agreement," the 9th circuit ruled.
The ruling highlights the need for competent attorneys in capital
punishment cases, Fisher said. "While I think the state has made some efforts to improve the quality of counsel, I think they're far short. The type of counsel they need for Idaho is an actual capital attorney unit," she said. "When you depend on the local public defenders it's impossible for them to have the resources or keep up on the law."
(source: The Associated Press)