By: Derek Hawkins//August 30, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Roy L. Ward v. Ron Neal
Case No.: 16-1001
Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and EASTERBROOK and ROVNER, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
Appellant suffered no prejudice from attorney highlight of appellant shortcomings to the jury.
“With that intentionally demanding statutory standard in mind, even assuming that Ward’s attorneys performed deficiently when they pounded into the jury’s mind the idea that Ward is a psychopath—not merely someone suffering from severe antisocial personality disorder—we cannot say that the state court’s conclusion that there was no prejudice was unreasonable. First, the state court unquestionably turned to the correct decision from the U.S. Supreme Court, and so there is no issue of a decision “contrary to” established law. Nor can we say that the Indiana Supreme Court unreasonably applied Strickland. The lay mitigation evidence that Ward gathered for the postconviction proceedings would have shown, if credited, that he was a well-behaved and thoughtful child, who had an especially close relationship with his grandfather. It would also have underscored Ward’s psychological problem with exhibitionism, hinting if not proving that this was something he either inherited from his father and grandfather, or maybe copied from them (both had the same problem). This evidence is not particularly strong, and it is largely cumulative of the mitigating evidence the second jury did hear.”
Affirmed