Powell v. Kelly
District Court, E.D. Virginia
1Opinion of the Court
CAPITAL POST CONVICTION PROCEEDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ELLIS, District Judge.
At issue in this capital habeas proceeding is petitioner 1 Paul Powell’s motion for appointment of a “mitigation specialist” prior to filing his § 2254 petition. Such an expert, petitioner contends, would assist habeas counsel in developing the forthcoming petition’s claim that trial counsel was unconstitutionally ineffective at sentencing by failing to investigate and adduce mitigating evidence about petitioner’s back ground. For the reasons that follow, the motion must be denied.
I
The procedural history of this case…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Wiggins v. Smith, WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Vasquez v. HillerySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Powell v. KellyDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2008
- Galindo v. JeffreysDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 2023