Goodin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-DR-00686-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-DR-00686-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-07-2003 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. Holding: APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO SEEK POSTCONVICTION RELIEF GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Death penalty – Post-conviction relief - Prosecutorial misconduct - Motion to strike rebuttal brief - Mental retardation - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Dying declaration Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Waller, Cobb and Graves, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : McRae, P.J., would grant. Concurs in Result Only: McRae, P.J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - DEATH PENALTY - POST CONVICTION |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-19-1999 Appealed from: Newton County Circuit Court Judge: Marcus D. Gordon Disposition: The Appellant was convited of capital murder and sentenced to death. District Attorney: Ken Turner Case Number: 99CR0002 |
|
| Note: | Motion to Strike Petitioner's Rebuttal Brief is denied. See Pages 9 and 10, Opinion of this Court handed down this date. Application for Leave to File Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, Granted in Part and Denied in Part. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Howard Dean Goodin (Gooden) |
TERRI L. MARROQUIN
ROBERT M. RYAN |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JUDY T. MARTIN MARVIN L. WHITE, JR. |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Death penalty – Post-conviction relief - Prosecutorial misconduct - Motion to strike rebuttal brief - Mental retardation - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Dying declaration |
| Summary of the Facts: | Howard Goodin was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. Goodin's conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. Goodin filed an Application for Leave to File Petition for Post-Conviction Relief. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Prosecutorial misconduct Goodin argues that the district attorney violated his right to a fair trial when he argued that Goodin was a liar and that the jury should punish him for that. Not only did Goodin fail to raise the issue on direct appeal, but the district attorney was merely arguing the facts, answering Goodin's defense that the State's witnesses were lying. Goodin also argues that it was error to allow the district attorney to make the closing argument that the victim did not enjoy the same rights the night of his murder as Goodin was enjoying during his trial. This argument was raised on direct appeal and rejected. Goodin also argues that the State violated his right to a fair trial where, on closing argument in the sentencing phase, it argued that capital punishment was endorsed by the Bible. Goodin failed to raise this issue on direct appeal. Issue 2: Motion to strike rebuttal brief The State filed a Motion to Strike Petitioner's Rebuttal Brief, in which it argues that Goodin cannot present new evidence on rebuttal to shore up arguments shown to be weak or without merit by the State. Although the State is correct in some of its arguments, a number of the Mississippi Office of Capital Post-Conviction’s actions were unavoidable, as the law on execution of the mentally retarded changed between the time Goodin filed his original application and his rebuttal. Therefore, the Motion to Strike Petitioner's Rebuttal Brief is not well-taken. Issue 3: Execution of the mentally retarded Goodin argues that the execution of the mentally retarded should be declared unconstitutional. The United States Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia, that the execution of mentally retarded offenders amounted to cruel and unusual punishment and was, therefore, prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Goodin has produced enough evidence to be granted leave to proceed in the trial court on the issue of his mental retardation. He must prove that he meets the applicable standard by a preponderance of the evidence. Issue 4: Ineffective assistance of counsel Goodin argues that his trial attorneys failed to investigate his mental retardation at trial. If Goodin is found to be mentally retarded within the meaning of Atkins then he cannot be executed. However, if he is found not to be retarded then counsel's allegedly deficient conduct in this area is irrelevant. This Court grants Goodin leave to proceed in the trial court on the issue of whether his attorney was ineffective for failure to investigate whether he was mentally ill. Goodin also argues that when counsel had him examined for competency to stand trial, the evaluator failed to take into account his long-standing history of mental illness and dismissed his claims about hallucinations, finding him competent. First, defense counsel did not have Goodin examined; the circuit court did. Any attempt to raise the circuit court's finding of competency as erroneous, as Goodin does, is procedurally barred at this point. Since this issue is so closely related to the issue of Goodin's mental illness, Goodin is granted leave to proceed in the trial court on this particular issue. Goodin also argues that he was denied adequate representation on direct appeal. These issues would have been procedurally barred on direct appeal because there was no contemporaneous objection at trial. Issue 5: Dying declaration Goodin argues that the court erred in allowing a witness to testify that the wounded victim told him that he did not know the man who had shot and robbed him, but his attacker was a black man. Not only did Goodin fail to raise this issue on direct appeal, but the statement was obviously relevant. Racial characteristics are unavoidably important factors in identification of defendants in criminal cases. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
