Showing 1 - 4 of 4 results
Nowill v. State of Georgia
Table of Contents Included in Document
Memorandum in Support of Habeas Petition in Child Sex Abuse Case
Open Records Request
Letter to Defense Expert
Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Moiton for New Trial
Motion for Issuance and Enforcement of Subpoena for Additional Medical Records
Ruling on Motion for New Trial and Ruling by Georgia Court of Appeals
Argument: With proper investigation, preparation, and presentation by the defense in this case, there is absolutely overwhelming evidence that supports Mr. Nowill's total innocence. Mr. Nowill is presently seven years into the service of his sentence of thirty years in prison because, to date, no sitting judge or sitting jury had presented to them the complete evidence in this case for their consideration. Mr. Nowill is, in fact, innocent.
Mr. Nowill is the father of the alleged victim, Heather Nowill. On August 13, 2000, Heather, then aged 16, claimed that her father had been having a sexual relationship with her over the previous four years since she was 12 years old. She claimed this sexual relationship involved digital penetration of her vagina, mutual oral sex between she and her father, and full acts of sexual intercourse with complete and full penetration of her vagina by her father's penis occurring 3 to 4 times weekly for the duration of the 4 year period of time. Stunned when he first confronted with these allegations on the day of her outcry, and continuing for 2 years including his testimony before the jury in this case, Mr. Nowill denied any sexual contact with his daughter and consistently has maintained his innocence.
On the day of her alleged outcry Heather was required to undergo a medical examination at University Hospital. The complete report of this examination was not provided to trial counsel by the State. Trial counsel did not independently request of subpoena the medical records of the examination. The State did not call the doctors who performed the medical examination to testify in the trial. Also, despite the extensive and ongoing allegations of intercourse by Heather, trial counsel did not request or subpoena the medical records from her regular doctor throughout the period of time in question. With virtually nothing except the word of the alleged victim the case proceeded to trial. Even law enforcement personnel admitted there was absolutely no physical evidence to support the allegation.
Burt v. Titlow
Brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondent.
Argument: The proposed “stated-belief-in-innocence” exception on which the state’s argument rests would be inconsistent with the role of counsel in our legal system, and with this Court’s decisions clearly establishing an attorney’s Sixth Amendment duty to provide effective assistance at the plea stage. Strickland allows courts to find a reasonable probability that a defendant would have pleaded guilty but for deficient counsel when either: (a) her testimony to that effect is bolstered by objective corroborating evidence; or (b) her testimony is inherently credible.
Reddy v. Kelly
Brief of Amicus Curiae National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of the Appellant Seeking Reversal.
Argument: The state court did not adjudicate Mr. Reddy’s ineffective assistance claim on the merits. The nature of PTSD supports the lesser-included offense of voluntary manslaughter. Any objective standard of reasonableness requires trial counsel to investigate and present evidence of known mental health disorders that are relevant to key issues in the case.