Dobbs v. Zant

Background

Wilburn Dobbs, convicted of murder in Georgia, was sentenced to death. In his first federal habeas petition he argued that his court-appointed lawyer failed to provide effective help at sentencing. The District Court held an evidentiary hearing but, because the State had said a transcript of the penalty-phase closing arguments was unavailable, relied on the lawyer’s testimony. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, also relying on that testimony. Later Dobbs located a transcript that contradicted key parts of his lawyer’s account and asked the Court of Appeals to supplement the record; the court denied the request and said the law of the case barred reopening the ineffective-help claim.

Reasoning

The key question was whether the appeals court should have considered the newly discovered sentencing transcript. The Supreme Court held the Court of Appeals erred by excluding the transcript. The opinion stressed the importance of reviewing capital sentences on a complete record, found the transcript plainly relevant to the ineffective-help issue, and explained that the delay in discovery resulted substantially from the State’s earlier, incorrect assertion that no transcript existed. For those reasons the Court reversed the Eleventh Circuit’s judgment and remanded for further proceedings with the full transcript considered.

Real world impact

Lower courts must consider newly found trial materials that could affect capital sentencing, especially when the State’s representations produced the delay. The case is sent back so Dobbs’s claim about his lawyer’s effectiveness at sentencing can be reevaluated on the complete penalty-phase record, but this ruling does not finally resolve all of his claims.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Scalia, joined by Justice Thomas, agreed the judgment should be reversed but argued the correction was unlikely to matter and criticized further delay in carrying out a long-standing death sentence.