Newman v. Harrington

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s habeas petition challenging his first-degree murder conviction on ground that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate his fitness for trial based on defendant’s diagnosis of mental retardation, his lengthy and well-documented history of severe mental and cognitive deficits, and his inability to respond appropriately to questions posed to him by trial court regarding his right to testify. Dist. Ct. properly found that there was reasonable probability that defendant would have been found to be unfit for trial had counsel sought fitness hearing, and state court unreasonably found to contrary, even though clinical evaluation of defendant by his expert took place three years after defendant’s initial incarceration. Govt.’s contention that defendant exaggerated his mental deficiencies for purposes of skewing his expert’s opinion did not require different result.