Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan, A.K.A., Billy Patrick Wayne Hill v. Dora B. Schriro, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections

In this appeal, we consider whether petitioner, Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan, received ineffective assistance of counsel in the penalty phase of his capital murder trial. We conclude Landrigan has raised a colorable claim that his counsel’s performance fell below the objective standard of reasonableness required by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), and that he was prejudiced by these errors. We therefore remand to the district court to conduct an evidentiary hearing on Landrigan’s claim.

BACKGROUND

In 1989, Landrigan escaped from an Oklahoma prison and soon thereafter murdered Chester Dean Dyer in Arizona. He was convicted of first degree murder in Arizona state court and sentenced to death. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence. Arizona v. Landrigan, 176 Ariz. 1, 8 , 859 P.2d 111 (1993). 1

Landrigan filed a petition for post-conviction relief in the Arizona Superior Court, urging that his counsel, ' Dennis Farrell, had been ineffective by failing to investigate and present mitigating evidence at the sentencing proceeding. Lan-drigan also requested an evidentiary hearing in connection with this claim. The…

dissenting:

Although I agree with the majority’s conclusion that counsel’s limited investigation of Landrigan’s background fell below the standards of professional representation prevailing in 1990,1 would not remand this case for an evidentiary hearing because Landrigan has failed to allege facts that, if proven, would demonstrate Strickland prejudice.

We “review de novo [a] district court’s interpretation of AEDPA standards governing the grant or denial of an evidentia-ry hearing.” Earp, 431 F.3d at 1166. We may reverse the denial of an evidentiary hearing only if the district court abused its discretion. Id.

To establish entitlement to an evidentia-ry hearing, Landrigan must demonstrate an objectively reasonable probability that, had counsel proved the mitigating facts now alleged, the sentencing judge would not have imposed the death penalty. See Summerlin, 427 F.3d at 643. Landrigan alleges that his birth mother exposed him to alcohol and drugs in útero and later abandoned him, that he has a genetic predisposition for violence, that his adoptive mother was an alcoholic, and that, as a result of all these factors, he has antisocial personality disorder. 1 Whether these al…

441 F.3d 638 Jeffrey Timothy LANDRIGAN, a.k.a., Billy Patrick Wayne Hill, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dora B. SCHRIRO, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee. No. 00-99011. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted En Banc March 24, 2005. Submission Withdrawn April 15, 2005. Resubmitted March 1, 2006. Filed March 8, 2006. COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED Dale A. Baich, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Phoenix, AZ, for the petitioner-appellant. James P. Beene, Assistant Attorney General, Capital Litigation Section, Phoenix, AZ, for the respondent-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-96-02367-PHX-ROS. Before MARY M. SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, HARRY PREGERSON, STEPHEN REINHARDT, ALEX KOZINSKI, MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, KIM McLANE WARDLAW, WILLIAM A. FLETCHER, MARSHA S. BERZON, RICHARD R. CLIFTON, CONSUELO M. CALLAHAN and CARLOS T. BEA, Circuit Judges. HAWKINS, Circuit Judge. 1 In this appeal, we consider whether petitioner, Jeffrey Timothy Landrigan, received ineffective assistance of counsel in the penalty phase of…