Michael Wayne Jennings v. Jeanne Woodford, Warden of the California State Prison at San Quentin

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 5113·290 F.3d 1006·2002 WL 960025·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4021·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 9034
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 10, 200200-99008California6,909 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

In February 1984, a jury in Contra Cos-ta County, California, convicted Michael Wayne Jennings of first degree murder, forcible rape, first degree burglary, and robbery. After finding that Mr. Jennings had intentionally committed the murder during the commission of the rape, burglary, and robbery — a special circumstance permitting capital punishment — the jury voted to impose the death penalty. Mr. Jennings appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. He seeks reversal of both his sentence and his conviction.

Mr. Jennings claims his trial counsel was unreasonably and prejudicially ineffective under the standard set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), by failing to investigate or present mental health defenses in either the guilt or penalty phases of his capital trial. He further argues that his trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective because of multiple conflicts of interest. Because the State provides no basis upon which to conclude that a reasonable tactical decision motivated trial counsel’s abject failure to discover and consider vast and easily obtainable information…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.