rompilla
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
argued
january
decided
june
petitioner
rompilla
convicted
murder
crimes
penalty
phase
jury
found
aggravating
factors
murder
committed
felony
committed
torture
rompilla
significant
history
felony
convictions
indicating
use
threat
violence
mitigation
five
members
rompilla
family
beseeched
jury
mercy
sentenced
death
pennsylvania
affirmed
new
lawyers
filed
state
postconviction
relief
claiming
ineffective
assistance
trial
counsel
failing
present
significant
mitigating
evidence
rompilla
childhood
mental
capacity
health
alcoholism
state
courts
found
trial
counsel
sufficiently
investigated
mitigation
possibilities
rompilla
raised
inadequate
representation
federal
habeas
petition
district
found
state
unreasonably
applied
strickland
washington
concluding
trial
counsel
investigated
obvious
signs
rompilla
troubled
childhood
suffered
mental
illness
alcoholism
unjustifiably
relying
instead
rompilla
description
unexceptional
background
reversing
third
circuit
found
nothing
unreasonable
state
application
strickland
given
defense
counsel
efforts
uncover
mitigation
evidence
rompilla
certain
family
members
three
mental
health
experts
distinguished
wiggins
smith
counsel
failed
investigate
adequately
point
ignoring
leads
limited
enquiry
yielded
noting
although
trial
counsel
unearth
useful
information
rompilla
school
medical
police
prison
records
investigation
gone
far
enough
give
reason
think
efforts
wise
use
limited
resources
held
even
capital
defendant
family
members
suggested
mitigating
evidence
available
lawyer
bound
make
reasonable
efforts
obtain
review
material
counsel
knows
prosecution
probably
rely
evidence
aggravation
trial
sentencing
phase
pp
rompilla
entitlement
federal
habeas
relief
turns
showing
state
resolution
claim
strickland
resulted
decision
contrary
involved
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
state
result
must
incorrect
also
objectively
unreasonable
wiggins
supra
judging
defense
investigation
preparing
capital
trial
sentencing
phase
hindsight
discounted
pegging
adequacy
counsel
perspective
time
investigative
decisions
made
giving
deference
counsel
judgments
strickland
supra
pp
lawyers
deficient
failing
examine
file
rompilla
prior
rape
assault
conviction
knew
commonwealth
intended
seek
death
penalty
proving
rompilla
significant
history
felony
convictions
indicating
use
threat
violence
attempt
establish
history
proving
prior
conviction
emphasize
violent
character
introducing
transcript
rape
victim
trial
testimony
although
prior
conviction
file
public
record
readily
available
courthouse
rompilla
tried
counsel
looked
part
warned
prosecution
second
time
even
examine
entire
file
every
effort
view
facts
defense
lawyer
time
difficult
see
counsel
failed
realize
examining
file
seriously
compromise
opportunity
respond
aggravation
case
duty
make
reasonable
efforts
learn
offense
prosecution
going
use
certainly
included
obtaining
commonwealth
readily
available
file
learn
knew
crime
discover
mitigating
evidence
downplay
anticipate
details
emphasize
obligation
examine
file
particularly
pressing
violent
prior
offense
similar
crime
charged
rompilla
sentencing
strategy
stressed
residual
doubt
obligation
common
sense
also
described
american
bar
association
standards
criminal
justice
determining
reasonable
wiggins
supra
state
conclusion
defense
counsel
efforts
find
mitigating
evidence
means
enough
free
enquiry
fails
answer
considerations
set
point
objectively
unreasonable
reasonable
lawyer
forgo
examination
file
thinking
well
asking
defendant
family
relations
recalled
reasonable
lawyer
compare
possible
searches
school
reports
juvenile
records
evidence
drinking
habits
opportunity
take
look
file
disclosing
prosecutor
knows
plans
read
case
pp
state
courts
found
counsel
representation
adequate
never
reached
prejudice
element
strickland
claim
whether
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
different
de
novo
examination
element
shows
counsel
lapse
prejudicial
looked
prior
conviction
file
found
range
mitigation
leads
source
opened
imprisonment
records
contained
file
pictured
rompilla
childhood
mental
health
differently
anything
seen
heard
accumulated
entries
rompilla
series
incarcerations
often
related
alcohol
test
results
pointed
defense
mental
health
experts
schizophrenia
disorders
destroyed
benign
conception
rompilla
upbringing
mental
capacity
counsel
formed
talking
five
family
members
mental
health
experts
reports
effort
presumably
unearthed
much
material
postconviction
counsel
found
alerted
school
medical
prison
records
trial
counsel
never
saw
postconviction
counsel
found
red
flags
pointing
need
testing
revealed
organic
brain
damage
childhood
problems
probably
related
fetal
alcohol
syndrome
findings
turn
probably
prompted
look
easily
available
school
juvenile
records
showed
additional
problems
including
evidence
highly
abusive
home
life
evidence
adds
mitigation
case
bearing
relation
naked
pleas
mercy
actually
put
jury
undiscovered
mitigating
evidence
taken
whole
well
influenced
jury
appraisal
rompilla
culpability
wiggins
supra
likelihood
different
result
evidence
gone
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
actually
reached
sentencing
strickland
supra
pp
reversed
souter
delivered
opinion
stevens
ginsburg
breyer
joined
filed
concurring
opinion
kennedy
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
scalia
thomas
joined
ronald
rompilla
petitioner
jeffrey
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
writ
certiorari
appeals
third
circuit
june
justice
souter
delivered
opinion
case
calls
specific
application
standard
reasonable
competence
required
part
defense
counsel
sixth
amendment
hold
even
capital
defendant
family
members
defendant
suggested
mitigating
evidence
available
lawyer
bound
make
reasonable
efforts
obtain
review
material
counsel
knows
prosecution
probably
rely
evidence
aggravation
sentencing
phase
trial
morning
january
james
scanlon
discovered
dead
bar
ran
allentown
pennsylvania
body
stabbed
repeatedly
set
fire
rompilla
indicted
murder
related
offenses
commonwealth
gave
notice
intent
ask
death
penalty
two
public
defenders
assigned
case
jury
guilt
phase
trial
found
rompilla
guilty
counts
ensuing
penalty
phase
prosecutor
sought
prove
three
aggravating
factors
justify
death
sentence
murder
committed
course
another
felony
murder
committed
torture
rompilla
significant
history
felony
convictions
indicating
use
threat
violence
see
cons
stat
commonwealth
presented
evidence
three
aggravators
jury
found
proven
rompilla
evidence
mitigation
consisted
relatively
brief
testimony
five
family
members
argued
effect
residual
doubt
beseeched
jury
mercy
saying
believed
rompilla
innocent
good
man
rompilla
son
testified
loved
father
visit
prison
jury
acknowledged
evidence
point
finding
two
factors
mitigation
rompilla
son
testified
behalf
rehabilitation
possible
jurors
assigned
greater
weight
aggravating
factors
sentenced
rompilla
death
pennsylvania
affirmed
conviction
sentence
commonwealth
rompilla
december
new
lawyers
rompilla
filed
claims
pennsylvania
post
conviction
relief
act
cons
stat
et
seq
including
ineffective
assistance
trial
counsel
failing
present
significant
mitigating
evidence
rompilla
childhood
mental
capacity
health
alcoholism
postconviction
found
trial
counsel
done
enough
investigate
possibilities
mitigation
case
pennsylvania
affirmed
denial
relief
commonwealth
rompilla
rompilla
petitioned
writ
habeas
corpus
federal
district
raising
claims
included
inadequate
representation
district
found
state
unreasonably
applied
strickland
washington
penalty
phase
trial
granted
relief
ineffective
assistance
counsel
found
preparing
mitigation
case
defense
lawyers
failed
investigate
pretty
obvious
signs
rompilla
troubled
childhood
suffered
mental
illness
alcoholism
instead
relied
unjustifiably
rompilla
description
unexceptional
background
rompilla
horn
ed
july
app
divided
third
circuit
panel
reversed
rompilla
horn
majority
found
nothing
unreasonable
state
application
strickland
given
defense
counsel
efforts
uncover
mitigation
material
included
interviewing
rompilla
certain
family
members
well
consultation
three
mental
health
experts
although
majority
noted
lawyers
unearth
useful
information
found
rompilla
school
medical
police
prison
records
thought
lawyers
justified
failing
hunt
records
efforts
gave
reason
believe
search
yield
anything
helpful
panel
thus
distinguished
rompilla
case
wiggins
smith
whereas
wiggins
counsel
failed
investigate
adequately
point
even
ignoring
leads
limited
enquiry
yielded
appeals
saw
rompilla
investigation
going
far
enough
leave
counsel
reason
thinking
efforts
wise
use
limited
resources
judge
sloviter
dissent
stressed
trial
counsel
failure
obtain
relevant
records
rompilla
background
owing
lawyers
unreasonable
reliance
family
members
medical
experts
tell
records
might
useful
third
circuit
denied
rehearing
en
banc
vote
rompilla
horn
granted
certiorari
ii
rompilla
entitlement
federal
habeas
relief
turns
showing
state
resolution
claim
ineffective
assistance
counsel
strickland
washington
supra
resulted
decision
contrary
involved
unreasonable
application
clearly
established
federal
law
determined
unreasonable
application
occurs
state
correct
governing
legal
principle
decisions
unreasonably
applies
principle
facts
petitioner
case
wiggins
smith
supra
quoting
williams
taylor
opinion
state
decision
must
incorrect
erroneous
objectively
unreasonable
wiggins
smith
supra
quoting
williams
taylor
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
ineffective
assistance
strickland
deficient
performance
counsel
resulting
prejudice
performance
measured
objective
standard
reasonableness
prevailing
professional
norms
ibid
wiggins
smith
supra
case
like
others
recently
looks
norms
adequate
investigation
preparing
sentencing
phase
capital
trial
defense
counsel
job
counter
state
evidence
aggravated
culpability
evidence
mitigation
judging
defense
investigation
applying
strickland
generally
hindsight
discounted
pegging
adequacy
counsel
perspective
time
investigative
decisions
made
giving
heavy
measure
deference
counsel
judgments
standard
reasonableness
applied
one
stood
counsel
shoes
spawns
rules
merits
number
counsel
choices
case
subject
fair
debate
case
defense
counsel
simply
ignored
obligation
find
mitigating
evidence
workload
busy
public
defenders
keep
making
number
efforts
including
interviews
rompilla
members
family
examinations
reports
three
mental
health
experts
gave
opinions
guilt
phase
none
sources
proved
particularly
helpful
rompilla
contributions
mitigation
case
minimal
counsel
found
uninterested
helping
visit
prison
go
proposed
mitigation
strategy
rompilla
told
bored
listening
returned
cell
app
questions
childhood
schooling
answers
indicated
normal
save
quitting
school
ninth
grade
times
rompilla
even
actively
obstructive
sending
counsel
false
leads
lawyers
also
spoke
five
members
rompilla
family
former
wife
two
brothers
son
counsel
testified
developed
good
relationship
family
course
representation
state
postconviction
found
counsel
spoke
relatives
detailed
manner
attempting
unearth
mitigating
information
although
weight
finding
qualified
lawyers
concession
overwhelming
response
family
really
feel
though
knew
well
since
spent
majority
adult
years
childhood
years
custody
see
also
defense
counsel
also
said
family
coming
position
rompilla
innocent
looking
reasons
might
done
third
final
source
tapped
mitigating
material
cadre
three
mental
health
witnesses
asked
look
rompilla
mental
state
time
offense
competency
stand
trial
reports
revealed
nothing
useful
rompilla
case
lawyers
consequently
go
historical
source
might
cast
light
rompilla
mental
condition
new
counsel
entered
case
raise
rompilla
postconviction
claims
however
identified
number
likely
avenues
trial
lawyers
fruitfully
followed
building
mitigation
case
school
records
one
example
trial
counsel
never
examined
spite
professed
unfamiliarity
several
family
members
rompilla
childhood
despite
counsel
knowledge
rompilla
left
school
ninth
grade
others
examples
records
rompilla
juvenile
adult
incarcerations
counsel
consult
although
aware
client
criminal
record
counsel
knew
police
reports
provided
pretrial
discovery
rompilla
drinking
heavily
time
offense
lodging
app
hereinafter
lodging
although
one
mental
health
experts
reported
rompilla
troubles
alcohol
merited
investigation
app
counsel
look
evidence
history
dependence
alcohol
might
extenuating
significance
us
trial
counsel
commonwealth
respond
unexplored
possibilities
emphasizing
recognition
duty
investigate
force
defense
lawyers
scour
globe
something
turn
reasonably
diligent
counsel
may
draw
line
good
reason
think
investigation
waste
see
wiggins
smith
limited
investigation
reasonable
witnesses
brought
counsel
attention
provided
predominantly
harmful
information
commonwealth
argues
information
trial
counsel
gathered
rompilla
sources
gave
sound
reason
think
pointless
spend
time
money
additional
investigation
espoused
postconviction
counsel
say
room
debate
trial
counsel
obligation
follow
least
potential
lines
enquiry
need
say
however
point
clear
dispositive
lawyers
deficient
failing
examine
file
rompilla
prior
conviction
obvious
reason
failure
examine
rompilla
prior
conviction
file
fell
level
reasonable
performance
counsel
knew
commonwealth
intended
seek
death
penalty
proving
rompilla
significant
history
felony
convictions
indicating
use
threat
violence
aggravator
state
law
counsel
knew
commonwealth
attempt
establish
history
proving
rompilla
prior
conviction
rape
assault
emphasize
violent
character
introducing
transcript
rape
victim
testimony
given
earlier
trial
app
question
defense
counsel
notice
since
acknowledge
plea
letter
written
one
four
days
prior
trial
mentioned
prosecutor
plans
ibid
also
undisputed
prior
conviction
file
public
document
readily
available
asking
courthouse
rompilla
tried
clear
however
defense
counsel
look
part
file
including
transcript
warned
prosecution
second
time
colloquy
day
evidentiary
sentencing
phase
began
prosecutor
said
present
transcript
victim
testimony
establish
prior
conviction
defense
also
like
review
whatever
going
read
prosecutor
well
told
going
long
time
ago
certainly
opportunity
review
transcript
defense
well
like
copy
prosecutor
think
duty
provide
copy
public
record
gotten
transcript
time
prior
trial
made
one
copy
like
defense
well
judge
going
need
get
copy
going
need
get
copy
postconviction
evidentiary
hearing
rompilla
lawyer
confirmed
seen
transcript
hearing
exchange
took
place
crucially
even
obtaining
transcript
victim
testimony
eve
sentencing
hearing
counsel
apparently
examined
none
material
every
effort
view
facts
defense
lawyer
done
time
difficult
see
counsel
failed
realize
without
examining
readily
available
file
seriously
compromising
opportunity
respond
case
aggravation
prosecution
going
use
dramatic
facts
similar
prior
offense
rompilla
counsel
duty
make
reasonable
efforts
learn
offense
reasonable
efforts
certainly
included
obtaining
commonwealth
readily
available
file
prior
conviction
learn
commonwealth
knew
crime
discover
mitigating
evidence
commonwealth
downplay
anticipate
details
aggravating
evidence
commonwealth
without
making
reasonable
efforts
review
file
defense
counsel
hope
knowing
whether
prosecution
quoting
selectively
transcript
whether
circumstances
extenuating
behavior
described
victim
obligation
get
file
particularly
pressing
owing
similarity
violent
prior
offense
crime
charged
rompilla
sentencing
strategy
stressing
residual
doubt
without
making
efforts
learn
details
rebut
relevance
earlier
crime
convincing
argument
residual
doubt
certainly
beyond
notion
defense
counsel
must
obtain
information
state
use
defendant
simply
matter
common
sense
district
points
american
bar
association
standards
criminal
justice
circulation
time
rompilla
trial
describes
obligation
terms
one
misunderstand
circumstances
case
like
one
duty
lawyer
conduct
prompt
investigation
circumstances
case
explore
avenues
leading
facts
relevant
merits
case
penalty
event
conviction
investigation
always
include
efforts
secure
information
possession
prosecution
law
enforcement
authorities
duty
investigate
exists
regardless
accused
admissions
statements
lawyer
facts
constituting
guilt
accused
stated
desire
plead
guilty
aba
standards
criminal
justice
ed
supp
long
referred
aba
standards
determining
reasonable
wiggins
smith
quoting
strickland
washington
commonwealth
come
reason
think
quoted
standard
impertinent
argument
pennsylvania
amicus
say
defense
counsel
efforts
find
mitigating
evidence
means
excused
looking
prior
conviction
file
tr
oral
arg
course
position
taken
state
postconviction
courts
without
specifically
discussing
prior
case
file
found
defense
counsel
efforts
enough
free
obligation
enquire
commonwealth
rompilla
common
pleas
app
think
conclusion
state
fails
answer
considerations
set
point
objectively
unreasonable
conclusion
flouts
prudence
deny
defense
lawyer
try
look
file
knows
prosecution
cull
aggravating
evidence
let
alone
file
sitting
trial
courthouse
open
asking
reasonable
lawyer
forgo
examination
file
thinking
well
asking
defendant
family
relations
whether
recalled
anything
helpful
damaging
prior
victim
testimony
reasonable
lawyer
compare
possible
searches
school
reports
juvenile
records
evidence
drinking
habits
opportunity
take
look
file
disclosing
prosecutor
knows
even
plans
read
case
questioning
family
members
searching
old
records
promise
less
looking
needle
haystack
lawyer
truly
reason
doubt
needle
strickland
looking
file
prosecution
says
use
sure
bet
whatever
may
file
going
tell
defense
counsel
something
prosecution
produce
dissent
thinks
analysis
creates
rigid
per
se
rule
requires
defense
counsel
complete
review
file
prior
conviction
introduced
post
opinion
kennedy
mistake
counsel
fell
short
failed
make
reasonable
efforts
review
prior
conviction
file
despite
knowing
prosecution
intended
introduce
rompilla
prior
conviction
merely
entering
notice
conviction
evidence
quoting
damaging
testimony
rape
victim
case
unreasonableness
attempting
heightened
easy
availability
file
trial
courthouse
great
risk
testimony
similar
violent
crime
hamstring
counsel
chosen
defense
residual
doubt
owing
circumstances
state
courts
objectively
unreasonable
concluding
counsel
reasonably
decline
make
effort
review
file
situations
defense
lawyer
charged
knowledge
prosecutor
intends
use
prior
conviction
way
might
well
warrant
different
assessment
since
counsel
failure
look
file
fell
line
reasonable
practice
question
prejudice
whether
reasonable
probability
counsel
unprofessional
errors
result
proceeding
different
state
courts
found
representation
adequate
never
reached
issue
prejudice
app
examine
element
strickland
claim
de
novo
wiggins
smith
supra
agree
dissent
appeals
think
rompilla
shown
beyond
doubt
counsel
lapse
prejudicial
pennsylvania
indeed
even
contest
claim
prejudice
defense
lawyers
looked
file
rompilla
prior
conviction
uncontested
found
range
mitigation
leads
source
opened
file
transcript
prior
trial
records
rompilla
imprisonment
earlier
conviction
app
defense
counsel
testified
never
seen
prison
files
pictured
rompilla
childhood
mental
health
differently
anything
defense
counsel
seen
heard
evaluation
corrections
counselor
rompilla
reared
slum
environment
allentown
vicinity
early
came
attention
juvenile
authorities
quit
school
started
series
incarcerations
penna
often
assaultive
nature
commonly
related
alcoholic
beverages
lodging
file
discloses
test
results
defense
mental
health
experts
viewed
pointing
schizophrenia
disorders
test
scores
showing
third
grade
level
cognition
nine
years
schooling
accumulated
entries
destroyed
benign
conception
rompilla
upbringing
mental
capacity
defense
counsel
formed
talking
rompilla
family
members
reports
mental
health
experts
information
counsel
become
skeptical
impression
given
five
family
members
unquestionably
gone
build
mitigation
case
effort
presumably
unearthed
much
material
postconviction
counsel
found
including
testimony
several
members
rompilla
family
trial
counsel
interview
judge
sloviter
summarized
evidence
rompilla
parents
severe
alcoholics
drank
constantly
mother
drank
pregnancy
rompilla
brothers
eventually
developed
serious
drinking
problems
father
vicious
temper
frequently
beat
rompilla
mother
leaving
bruised
bragged
cheating
parents
fought
violently
least
one
occasion
mother
stabbed
father
abused
father
beat
young
hands
fists
leather
straps
belts
sticks
children
lived
terror
expressions
parental
love
affection
approval
instead
subjected
yelling
verbal
abuse
father
locked
rompilla
brother
richard
small
wire
mesh
dog
pen
filthy
excrement
filled
isolated
background
allowed
visit
children
speak
anyone
phone
indoor
plumbing
house
slept
attic
heat
children
given
clothes
attended
school
rags
citations
omitted
dissenting
opinion
jury
never
heard
neither
mental
health
experts
examined
rompilla
trial
found
nothing
helpful
rompilla
case
rompilla
postconviction
counterparts
alerted
information
school
medical
prison
records
trial
counsel
never
saw
found
plenty
pointing
need
test
sloviter
dissenting
tested
found
rompilla
suffers
organic
brain
damage
extreme
mental
disturbance
significantly
impairing
several
cognitive
functions
ibid
also
said
rompilla
problems
relate
back
childhood
likely
caused
fetal
alcohol
syndrome
rompilla
capacity
appreciate
criminality
conduct
conform
conduct
law
substantially
impaired
time
offense
sloviter
dissenting
findings
turn
probably
prompted
look
school
juvenile
records
easy
get
showing
example
rompilla
mother
missing
home
frequently
period
one
several
weeks
time
lodging
report
noted
mother
reported
frequently
influence
alcoholic
beverages
result
children
always
poorly
kept
filthy
side
also
condition
home
times
ibid
school
records
showed
rompilla
iq
mentally
retarded
range
evidence
adds
mitigation
case
bears
relation
naked
pleas
mercy
actually
put
jury
although
suppose
possible
jury
heard
still
decided
death
penalty
test
goes
without
saying
undiscovered
mitigating
evidence
taken
whole
well
influenced
jury
appraisal
rompilla
culpability
wiggins
quoting
williams
taylor
likelihood
different
result
evidence
gone
sufficient
undermine
confidence
outcome
actually
reached
sentencing
strickland
judgment
third
circuit
reversed
pennsylvania
must
either
retry
case
penalty
stipulate
life
sentence
ordered
ronald
rompilla
petitioner
jeffrey
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
writ
certiorari
appeals
third
circuit
june
justice
concurring
write
separately
put
rest
one
concern
dissent
worries
opinion
imposes
defense
counsel
rigid
requirement
review
documents
calls
file
prior
conviction
prosecution
might
rely
trial
post
opinion
kennedy
opinion
imposes
rule
see
ante
rather
today
decision
simply
applies
longstanding
approach
determining
whether
attorney
performance
unconstitutionally
deficient
strickland
washington
trial
counsel
performance
rompilla
case
falls
short
standard
attorneys
behavior
reasonable
considering
circumstances
particular
three
circumstances
made
attorneys
failure
examine
rompilla
prior
conviction
file
unreasonable
first
rompilla
attorneys
knew
client
prior
conviction
heart
prosecution
case
prior
conviction
went
collateral
matter
rather
one
aggravating
circumstances
making
rompilla
eligible
death
penalty
prosecutors
intended
merely
mention
fact
prior
conviction
read
testimony
details
crime
crime
besides
quite
violent
right
similar
murder
rompilla
trial
rompilla
committed
murder
issue
mere
three
months
release
prison
earlier
conviction
words
prosecutor
clearly
planned
use
details
prior
crime
powerful
evidence
rompilla
dangerous
man
death
penalty
appropriate
punishment
necessary
means
incapacitation
cf
app
prosecutor
argument
evidence
defense
prepared
meet
reasonable
defense
lawyer
attached
high
importance
obtaining
record
prior
trial
order
anticipate
find
ways
deflecting
prosecutor
aggravation
argument
second
prosecutor
planned
use
prior
conviction
threatened
eviscerate
one
defense
primary
mitigation
arguments
rompilla
convicted
basis
strong
circumstantial
evidence
lawyers
structured
entire
mitigation
argument
around
hope
convincing
jury
residual
doubt
rompilla
guilt
made
inappropriate
impose
death
penalty
announcing
intention
introduce
testimony
rompilla
similar
prior
offense
prosecutor
put
rompilla
attorneys
notice
prospective
defense
mitigation
likely
ineffective
counterproductive
similarities
two
crimes
combined
timing
already
strong
circumstantial
evidence
raised
strong
likelihood
jury
reject
rompilla
residual
doubt
argument
rompilla
attorneys
reliance
transparently
weak
argument
risked
damaging
credibility
scenario
called
investigation
determine
whether
circumstances
prior
case
gave
hope
saving
residual
doubt
argument
whether
best
strategy
instead
jettison
argument
focus
promising
issues
cf
yarborough
gentry
per
curiam
bell
cone
noting
sound
tactical
judgment
may
sometimes
call
omitting
certain
defense
evidence
arguments
third
attorneys
decision
obtain
rompilla
prior
conviction
file
result
informed
tactical
decision
lawyers
time
best
spent
although
rompilla
attorneys
ample
warning
details
rompilla
prior
conviction
critical
case
failure
obtain
file
necessarily
deficient
resulted
lawyers
careful
exercise
judgment
best
marshal
time
serve
client
rompilla
attorneys
ignore
prior
case
file
order
spend
time
crucial
leads
determine
file
inaccessible
large
examining
necessarily
divert
tasks
thought
promising
learn
hour
prosecution
intent
use
prior
conviction
late
change
plans
rather
failure
obtain
crucial
file
result
inattention
reasoned
strategic
judgment
wiggins
smith
result
conduct
fell
constitutionally
required
standards
see
trategic
choices
made
less
complete
investigation
reasonable
extent
professional
judgments
support
limitations
quoting
strickland
particular
circumstances
case
attorneys
failure
obtain
review
case
file
client
prior
conviction
meet
standards
reasonable
professional
judgmen
opinion
consistent
examination
called
cases
williams
taylor
join
opinion
ronald
rompilla
petitioner
jeffrey
beard
secretary
pennsylvania
department
corrections
writ
certiorari
appeals
third
circuit
june
justice
kennedy
chief
justice
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
today
brands
two
committed
criminal
defense
attorneys
ineffective
outside
wide
range
professionally
competent
counsel
strickland
washington
look
old
case
file
stumble
upon
something
set
find
implication
also
labels
incompetent
work
done
three
mental
health
professionals
examined
ronald
rompilla
reach
result
majority
imposes
defense
counsel
rigid
requirement
review
documents
calls
case
file
prior
conviction
prosecution
might
rely
trial
holding
mistake
standard
review
troubling
case
arises
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
order
grant
rompilla
habeas
relief
must
say
indeed
say
pennsylvania
objectively
unreasonable
failing
anticipate
today
new
case
file
rule
respectful
submission
state
unreasonable
majority
holding
place
sixth
amendment
jurisprudence
followed
often
result
less
effective
counsel
diverting
limited
defense
resources
important
tasks
order
satisfy
new
per
se
rule
finally
even
justify
distortion
strickland
rompilla
still
entitled
relief
able
conclude
otherwise
ignoring
established
principle
defendant
state
burden
demonstrating
prejudiced
deficiency
attorneys
performance
reasons
dissent
standard
review
investigation
performed
rompilla
counsel
preparation
sentencing
adequate
also
conscientious
rompilla
attorneys
recognized
outset
building
effective
mitigation
case
crucial
helping
client
avoid
death
penalty
app
rompilla
stood
accused
brutal
crime
january
james
scanlon
murdered
closing
cozy
corner
cafe
bar
owned
allentown
pennsylvania
scanlon
body
discovered
later
next
morning
lying
pool
blood
scanlon
stabbed
multiple
times
including
wounds
around
neck
head
scanlon
also
beaten
blunt
object
face
gashed
possibly
shards
broken
liquor
beer
bottles
found
scene
crime
scanlon
stabbed
death
body
set
fire
substantial
evidence
linked
rompilla
crime
see
generally
commonwealth
rompilla
cozy
corner
cafe
near
closing
time
night
murder
observed
going
bathroom
approximately
times
period
window
bathroom
police
later
determined
probable
point
entry
used
scanlon
assailant
pair
rompilla
sneakers
seized
police
matched
bloody
footprint
found
near
victim
body
blood
sneakers
matched
victim
blood
type
rompilla
fingerprint
found
one
two
knives
used
commit
murder
sometime
leaving
bar
night
murder
rompilla
checked
nearby
motel
false
name
although
told
police
left
bar
two
dollars
rompilla
paid
cash
room
flashed
large
amount
money
desk
clerks
victim
wallet
discovered
bushes
outside
rompilla
motel
room
police
questioned
rompilla
murder
version
events
inconsistent
testimony
witnesses
rompilla
represented
trial
fredrick
charles
chief
public
defender
lehigh
county
time
maria
dantos
assistant
public
defender
charles
dantos
assisted
john
whispell
investigator
public
defender
office
rompilla
defense
team
sought
develop
mitigating
evidence
various
sources
first
questioned
rompilla
extensively
upbringing
background
app
make
conversations
productive
provided
rompilla
list
mitigating
circumstances
recognized
pennsylvania
law
cf
strickland
hen
defendant
given
counsel
reason
believe
pursuing
certain
investigations
fruitless
even
harmful
counsel
failure
pursue
investigations
may
later
challenged
unreasonable
second
charles
dantos
arranged
rompilla
examined
three
experienced
mental
health
professionals
experts
described
charles
best
forensic
psychiatrist
around
another
tremendous
psychiatrist
fabulous
forensic
psychologist
app
finally
rompilla
attorneys
questioned
family
extensively
search
information
might
help
spare
rompilla
death
penalty
dantos
particular
developed
close
relationship
rompilla
family
constant
source
information
indeed
trial
rompilla
wife
sent
dantos
letter
expressing
gratitude
letter
referred
charles
dantos
superb
human
beings
fought
felt
everything
rompilla
family
ibid
acknowledges
steps
taken
rompilla
attorneys
preparation
sentencing
finds
fault
nonetheless
lawyers
deficient
says
failing
examine
file
rompilla
prior
conviction
ante
prior
conviction
refers
rompilla
conviction
rape
burglary
theft
see
commonwealth
rompilla
super
sentencing
phase
capital
case
commonwealth
informed
rompilla
attorneys
intended
use
prior
crimes
prove
one
statutory
aggravating
circumstances
namely
rompilla
significant
history
felony
convictions
involving
use
threat
violence
person
cons
stat
rompilla
attorneys
notice
commonwealth
plans
concludes
effective
assistance
counsel
required
review
prior
conviction
case
file
per
se
rule
requiring
counsel
every
case
review
records
prior
convictions
used
state
aggravation
evidence
radical
departure
strickland
progeny
warned
past
creation
specific
guidelines
checklist
judicial
evaluation
attorney
performance
roe
particular
set
detailed
rules
counsel
conduct
satisfactorily
take
account
variety
circumstances
faced
defense
counsel
range
legitimate
decisions
regarding
best
represent
criminal
defendant
set
rules
interfere
constitutionally
protected
independence
counsel
restrict
wide
latitude
counsel
must
making
tactical
decisions
indeed
existence
detailed
guidelines
representation
distract
overriding
mission
vigorous
advocacy
defendant
cause
strickland
citations
omitted
reason
referred
aba
standards
criminal
justice
useful
point
reference
careful
say
standards
guides
establish
constitutional
baseline
effective
assistance
counsel
ibid
majority
parsing
guidelines
binding
statutory
text
ignores
admonition
majority
analysis
contains
barely
mention
strickland
makes
little
effort
square
today
holding
traditional
reluctance
impose
rigid
requirements
defense
counsel
disclaims
intention
create
rule
ante
see
also
ante
concurring
affords
little
comfort
opinion
makes
clear
imposed
counsel
broad
obligation
review
prior
conviction
case
files
priors
used
aggravation
review
every
document
files
every
single
page
every
document
regardless
prosecution
proposed
use
prior
conviction
infra
one
member
majority
tries
limit
new
rule
arguing
counsel
decision
result
informed
tactical
decision
ante
concurring
record
gives
support
notion
also
protests
exceptional
weight
rompilla
attorneys
sentencing
placed
residual
doubt
required
review
prior
conviction
file
ante
ante
concurring
fact
residual
doubt
central
rompilla
mitigation
case
rompilla
family
members
testify
sentencing
thought
innocent
dantos
tried
draw
attention
away
point
instead
use
family
testimony
humanize
rompilla
ask
mercy
app
majority
also
disregards
sound
strategic
calculation
supporting
decisions
made
rompilla
attorneys
charles
dantos
aware
rompilla
priors
aware
circumstances
surrounding
convictions
postconviction
hearing
dantos
also
indicated
reviewed
documents
relating
prior
conviction
ibid
based
information
well
numerous
conversations
rompilla
family
charles
dantos
reasonably
conclude
reviewing
full
prior
conviction
case
file
best
allocation
resources
majority
concludes
otherwise
ignoring
strickland
command
udicial
scrutiny
counsel
performance
must
highly
deferential
according
constitution
required
nothing
less
full
review
prior
conviction
case
file
rompilla
attorneys
even
benefit
hindsight
struggles
explain
file
proved
helpful
offering
vague
speculation
rompilla
attorneys
might
discovered
circumstances
extenuated
behavior
described
rape
victim
ante
means
circumstances
mystery
referring
details
rompilla
mental
fitness
upbringing
surely
rompilla
attorneys
likely
discover
information
sources
consulted
rompilla
family
three
mental
health
experts
examined
perhaps
circumstances
majority
refers
details
rompilla
crimes
charles
dantos
however
enough
information
prior
convictions
determine
reviewing
case
file
effective
use
time
rompilla
convicted
breaking
residence
josephine
macrenna
lived
apartment
bar
owned
app
macrenna
gave
bar
receipts
night
rompilla
demanded
disrobe
initially
resisted
rompilla
slashed
left
breast
knife
rompilla
held
macrenna
knifepoint
raped
hour
charles
dantos
aware
circumstances
prior
conviction
brutality
crime
take
review
case
file
know
quibbling
commonwealth
version
events
dubious
trial
strategy
sentencing
dantos
fought
vigorously
prevent
commonwealth
introducing
details
crimes
transcript
admitted
nothing
done
rompilla
unlikely
endear
jury
arguing
prior
conviction
burglary
theft
rape
really
bad
commonwealth
making
recognizing
rompilla
attorneys
instead
devoted
limited
time
resources
developing
mitigation
case
efforts
turned
little
useful
evidence
make
ex
ante
strategic
calculation
rompilla
attorneys
constitutionally
deficient
one
primary
reasons
rejected
checklist
approach
effective
assistance
counsel
new
requirement
risks
distracting
attorneys
real
objective
providing
vigorous
advocacy
dictated
facts
circumstances
particular
case
rigid
requirement
counsel
always
review
case
files
convictions
prosecution
seeks
use
trial
distraction
capital
defendants
often
history
crime
example
percent
inmates
death
row
prior
felony
convictions
dept
justice
bureau
justice
statistics
bonczar
snell
capital
punishment
available
http
visited
june
available
clerk
case
file
prosecution
relies
convictions
aggravators
obligated
defense
attorneys
review
boxes
documents
come
imposing
new
rule
counsel
case
review
entire
file
ease
ante
simply
support
record
assumption
case
files
often
comprise
numerous
boxes
file
may
contain
among
things
witness
statements
forensic
evidence
arrest
reports
grand
jury
transcripts
testimony
exhibits
relating
pretrial
suppression
hearings
trial
transcripts
trial
exhibits
motions
presentence
reports
full
review
even
single
prior
conviction
case
file
time
consuming
many
documents
file
duplicative
irrelevant
recognizing
flaw
analysis
suggests
cases
involving
warehouses
records
call
greater
subtlety
ibid
yet
know
case
time
component
tells
us
nothing
number
hours
counsel
available
prepare
sentencing
decisions
made
allocating
time
flawed
constitute
deficient
performance
strickland
today
decision
increase
resources
committed
capital
defense
time
rompilla
trial
lehigh
county
public
defender
office
two
investigators
cases
app
defense
attorneys
dutifully
comply
new
rule
divert
resources
tasks
net
effect
today
holding
many
cases
instances
trial
counsel
reasonably
conclude
reviewing
old
case
files
effective
use
time
diminish
quality
representation
consistently
declined
impose
mechanical
rules
counsel
even
rules
might
lead
better
representation
roe
see
occasion
depart
approach
order
impose
requirement
might
well
lead
worse
representation
quite
possible
defense
attorneys
recognizing
absurdity
approach
effective
advocacy
simply
ignore
new
requirement
continue
exercise
best
judgment
allocate
time
resources
preparation
trial
decision
understandable
might
even
required
state
ethical
rules
cf
rules
professional
conduct
preamble
rule
leaves
open
possibility
defendant
seek
overturn
conviction
based
something
prior
conviction
case
file
went
unreviewed
elevation
claims
status
constitutional
violations
benefit
undeserving
defendants
saddle
considerable
costs
retrial
resentencing
today
decision
wrong
standard
error
compounded
fact
case
arises
federal
habeas
pennsylvania
adjudicated
rompilla
claim
merits
means
deferential
standard
review
applies
rompilla
must
show
pennsylvania
decision
incorrect
erroneous
objectively
unreasonable
lockyer
andrade
citing
williams
taylor
pays
lipservice
williams
standard
proceeds
adopt
rigid
per
se
obligation
binds
counsel
every
case
finds
little
support
precedents
indeed
strickland
case
purports
apply
directly
contrary
important
adjudicating
claim
actual
ineffectiveness
counsel
keep
mind
principles
stated
establish
mechanical
rules
pennsylvania
gave
careful
consideration
rompilla
sixth
amendment
claim
concluded
counsel
reasonably
relied
upon
discussions
rompilla
upon
experts
determine
records
needed
evaluate
mental
health
potential
mitigating
circumstances
commonwealth
rompilla
decision
far
unreasonable
pennsylvania
courts
hardly
faulted
failing
anticipate
today
abrupt
departure
strickland
reminded
federal
courts
often
need
show
requisite
level
deference
judgments
holland
jackson
per
curiam
middleton
mcneil
per
curiam
yarborough
gentry
per
curiam
mitchell
esparza
per
curiam
early
packer
per
curiam
woodford
visciotti
per
curiam
ignoring
admonition
today
adopts
approach
federal
habeas
review
ii
even
accepting
misguided
analysis
adequacy
representation
rompilla
trial
counsel
rompilla
still
entitled
habeas
relief
strickland
assigns
defendant
burden
demonstrating
prejudice
rompilla
satisfy
standard
remarkable
leap
conclude
otherwise
theory
prejudice
rests
serendipity
nothing
old
case
file
diminishes
aggravating
nature
prior
conviction
way
rompilla
attorneys
minimized
aggravating
force
earlier
rape
conviction
dantos
forceful
ultimately
unsuccessful
fight
exclude
transcript
sentencing
recognizing
problem
instead
finds
prejudice
chance
rompilla
attorneys
reviewed
case
file
prior
rape
burglary
conviction
says
stumbled
across
range
mitigation
leads
ante
range
leads
refers
fact
handful
notations
within
single
document
document
initial
transfer
petition
appears
prepared
pennsylvania
department
corrections
rompilla
conviction
facilitate
initial
assignment
one
commonwealth
prisons
lodging
rompilla
demonstrate
prejudice
nothing
record
indicates
rompilla
trial
attorneys
discovered
transfer
petition
clues
contained
reviewed
old
file
majority
faults
rompilla
attorneys
failing
learn
commonwealth
knew
crime
discover
mitigating
evidence
commonwealth
downplay
anticipate
details
aggravating
evidence
commonwealth
emphasize
ante
yet
rompilla
attorneys
reviewed
case
file
purposes
mind
almost
surely
attributed
significance
transfer
petition
following
cursory
review
petition
prepared
bureau
correction
rompilla
conviction
purpose
determining
rompilla
initial
prison
assignment
contained
details
regarding
circumstances
conviction
reviewing
prior
conviction
file
information
counter
commonwealth
counsel
looked
first
transcript
trial
testimony
perhaps
probative
exhibits
forensic
evidence
reason
counsel
read
even
skim
obscure
document
claims
transfer
petition
discovered
file
transcript
ante
characterization
misleading
conclusion
draws
accordingly
fallacious
record
indicates
transfer
petition
part
case
file
rompilla
provides
indication
size
file
know
originally
comprised
several
boxes
documents
app
time
rompilla
state
postconviction
hearing
moreover
transfer
petition
stored
file
transferred
microfilm
implies
prejudice
presumed
pennsylvania
conspicuously
failed
contest
rompilla
argument
ante
commonwealth
strategy
unsurprising
given
discussion
prior
conviction
case
file
takes
one
paragraph
rompilla
argument
brief
petitioner
also
irrelevant
well
established
rompilla
commonwealth
burden
establishing
prejudice
strickland
supra
majority
thus
finds
bind
counsel
alleged
deficiency
lies
failure
review
file
purposes
majority
identified
prejudice
reasonable
probability
review
file
purposes
led
counsel
accord
transfer
petition
enough
attention
discover
leads
majority
cites
prejudice
demonstrated
deficiency
counsel
performance
described
failure
perform
purposive
review
file
instead
failure
accord
intense
scrutiny
every
single
page
every
single
document
file
regardless
purpose
motivating
review
times
hints
new
obligation
counsel
sweeps
broadly
see
ante
ease
counsel
examine
entire
file
ante
ounsel
way
knowing
context
transcript
details
prior
conviction
without
looking
file
whole
surely
however
require
defense
counsel
look
every
document
matter
tangential
included
prior
conviction
file
chance
notation
therein
might
provide
lead
turn
might
result
discovery
useful
information
constitution
mandate
defense
attorneys
perform
busy
work
rigid
requirement
divert
counsel
limited
time
energy
away
important
tasks
way
ultimately
disserve
rationale
underlying
new
rule
ensure
defense
counsel
counter
state
aggravation
case
effectively
intend
impose
counsel
constitutional
obligation
review
every
page
every
document
included
case
file
prior
conviction
today
holding
even
misguided
imagined
strickland
anticipated
temptation
counsel
assistance
conviction
adverse
sentence
cautioned
fair
assessment
attorney
performance
requires
every
effort
made
eliminate
distorting
effects
hindsight
reconstruct
circumstances
counsel
challenged
conduct
evaluate
conduct
counsel
perspective
time
today
succumbs
temptation
strickland
warned
process
majority
imposes
defense
attorneys
rigid
requirement
finds
support
cases
common
sense
affirm
judgment
appeals
footnotes
reverse
grounds
occasion
consider
rompilla
claim
simmons
south
carolina
enough
say
retrial
rompilla
sentence
governed
simmons
line
cases
similar
exchange
took
place
hearing
indictment
record
rompilla
prior
conviction
defense
well
think
need
look
indictment
charged
committing
prosecutor
copy
forgot
bring
right
defense
see
judge
sure
going
get
prosecutor
public
record
gone
sic
lunch
looked
like
app
defense
counsel
also
stated
postconviction
hearing
believed
point
looked
files
regarding
prior
conviction
familiar
particulars
case
recall
files
obtained
addition
counsel
apparently
obtained
rompilla
rap
sheet
showed
prior
convictions
including
one
rape
oral
argument
arguing
amicus
support
pennsylvania
maintained
counsel
fulfilled
obligations
investigate
prior
conviction
obtaining
rap
sheet
tr
oral
arg
rap
sheet
reveal
charges
dispositions
reasonable
substitute
prior
conviction
file
dissent
nonetheless
concludes
evidence
counsel
knew
needed
know
prior
conviction
post
opinion
kennedy
given
counsel
limited
investigation
prior
conviction
dissent
parsing
record
seems
generous
fault
ease
counsel
examine
entire
file
makes
application
standard
correspondingly
easy
suffice
say
state
warehouses
records
available
particular
case
review
counsel
performance
call
greater
subtlety
requirement
answers
dissent
contention
defense
counsel
provided
effective
assistance
regard
prior
conviction
file
argued
prejudicial
allow
introduction
transcript
post
brief
amicus
curiae
counsel
obligation
rebut
aggravating
evidence
extended
beyond
arguing
kept
noted
supra
page
counsel
way
knowing
context
transcript
details
prior
conviction
without
looking
file
whole
counsel
effectively
rebut
aggravation
case
build
case
mitigation
merit
contention
enquiry
prior
conviction
file
fruitless
sole
reason
transcript
introduced
establish
aggravator
rompilla
committed
prior
violent
felonies
brief
amicus
curiae
government
maintains
transcript
incontrovertibly
establish
fact
rompilla
committed
violent
felony
defense
expected
rebut
aggravator
investigation
file
analysis
ignores
fact
sentencing
jury
required
weigh
aggravating
factors
mitigating
factors
may
reasonably
assume
jury
give
relative
weight
prior
violent
felony
aggravator
defense
counsel
missed
opportunity
argue
circumstances
prior
conviction
less
damning
prosecution
characterization
conviction
suggest
new
version
standards
reads
investigation
include
efforts
secure
information
possession
prosecution
law
enforcement
authorities
whereas
version
effect
time
rompilla
trial
provided
investigation
always
include
efforts
aba
standards
criminal
justice
prosecution
function
defense
function
ed
see
material
difference
two
phrasings
case
think
situation
defense
counsel
make
effort
learn
information
possession
prosecution
law
enforcement
authorities
shortly
rompilla
trial
aba
promulgated
set
guidelines
specifically
devoted
setting
forth
obligations
defense
counsel
death
penalty
cases
aba
guidelines
appointment
performance
counsel
death
penalty
cases
hereinafter
aba
guidelines
guideline
guidelines
applied
clear
requirements
investigation
set
forth
earlier
standards
death
penalty
cases
imposed
similarly
forceful
directive
counsel
make
efforts
secure
information
possession
prosecution
law
enforcement
authorities
including
police
reports
guideline
argues
rompilla
defense
counsel
complied
guidelines
focuses
attentions
different
guideline
brief
amicus
curiae
guideline
concerns
practices
working
defendant
potential
witnesses
contends
imposes
requirement
obtain
one
particular
type
record
information
ibid
argument
ignores
subsequent
guideline
quoted
fact
reprinted
appendix
brief
requires
counsel
efforts
secure
information
possession
prosecution
law
enforcement
authorities
app
later
current
aba
guidelines
relating
death
penalty
defense
even
explicit
counsel
must
investigate
prior
convictions
used
aggravating
circumstances
otherwise
come
evidence
prior
conviction
legally
flawed
counsel
seek
set
aside
counsel
may
also
find
extenuating
circumstances
offered
lessen
weight
conviction
aba
guidelines
appointment
performance
defense
counsel
death
penalty
cases
comment
rev
ed
reprinted
hofstra
rev
footnotes
omitted
decision
wiggins
made
precisely
point
citing
earlier
aba
guidelines
aba
guidelines
provide
investigations
mitigating
evidence
comprise
efforts
discover
reasonably
available
mitigating
evidence
evidence
rebut
aggravating
evidence
may
introduced
quoting
aba
guideline
emphasis
original
reasons
given
text
investigation
needed
point
reasonable
duty
look
file
question
dissent
ignore
opportunity
find
evidence
ground
discovery
consequent
analysis
prejudice
rests
serendipity
post
counsel
obligation
examine
file
counsel
make
reasonable
efforts
learn
contents
done
reasonably
ignored
mitigation
evidence
red
flags
simply
unexpected
dissent
however
assumes
counsel
reasonably
decline
even
read
file
see
post
counsel
reviewed
case
file
mitigating
evidence
reason
counsel
read
even
skim
obscure
document
well
true
counsel
faced
large
amount
possible
evidence
see
supra
indication
examining
case
file
question
required
significant
labor
indeed
pennsylvania
conspicuously
failed
contest
rompilla
claim
information
located
prior
conviction
file
reasonable
efforts
led
counsel
information