Spicer v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Mississippi considered Fred Sanford Spicer, Jr.'s petition for post-conviction relief following his capital-murder conviction and death sentence. The court granted leave for a limited evidentiary hearing on whether trial counsel were ineffective during the penalty phase for failing to investigate and present mitigation evidence concerning Spicer's character and childhood history, while rejecting or finding procedurally barred his other claims.

Holdings

1. Spicer made a minimally sufficient showing to proceed in the trial court with an evidentiary hearing limited to whether trial counsel were ineffective for failing to investigate and present mitigating evidence concerning his character and childhood history.
2. The remaining ineffective-assistance claims did not warrant relief because they were procedurally barred, had been decided on direct appeal, or failed to establish deficient performance and prejudice.
3. Spicer was not entitled to an Atkins hearing because his expert affidavit did not state that he was not malingering or that he met the applicable definition of mental retardation, including adaptive-skill limitations.
4. The petition for post-conviction relief was granted in part and denied in part.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Spicer made a minimally sufficient showing of ineffective assistance of counsel during the penalty phase by alleging that counsel failed to investigate and present mitigation evidence concerning his character and childhood history.
2. Whether the remaining ineffective-assistance claims were procedurally barred, lacked deficient performance or prejudice, or had already been resolved on direct appeal.
3. Whether claims concerning shackling before the jury venire, juror misconduct, cumulative error, lethal injection, and the First Amendment were procedurally barred or meritless.
4. Whether Spicer satisfied Mississippi's requirements for an evidentiary hearing on an Atkins claim of mental retardation.

Disposition

other