The Tennessee Supreme Court has upheld a death row inmate’s conviction for first degree murder. However, it has ordered a new sentencing hearing because the lawyers representing the man at trial did not properly represent him.
Jerry Ray Davidson was convicted of the 1995 murder of Virginia Jackson in Dickson. At the time of his trial, his defense attorneys possessed numerous records documenting Mr. Davidson’s troubled background and long history of mental illness. During the sentencing hearing following Mr. Davidson’s conviction for first degree murder, his lawyers failed to provide the jury with any evidence about Mr. Davidson’s history of psychiatric problems. Accordingly, the jury sentenced Mr. Davidson to death without knowing about his diminished mental functioning.
In this challenge to his conviction and sentence, Mr. Davidson argued that the lawyers who represented him at trial violated his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel by failing to inform the jury of his physical brain abnormalities, cognitive deficiencies, and psychoses. In addressing these claims, the Supreme Court agreed that defense attorneys in death penalty cases have a constitutional duty to collect and present to the jury any “mitigation evidence” that could help the jury assess the defendant’s moral culpability.
The Supreme Court held that the attorneys’ failure to provide the jury with any information concerning Mr. Davidson’s brain abnormalities and cognitive and psychological problems deprived Mr. Davidson of his constitutional right to effective representation. Although the Court upheld his convictions for first degree premeditated murder and aggravated kidnapping, the Court remanded his case to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing.
In a separate opinion, Justice Gary R. Wade concurred with the Court’s conclusion that Mr. Davidson was entitled to a new sentencing hearing. However, Justice Wade also decided that Mr. Davidson’s attorneys had not effectively represented him during the guilt phase of the trial and, therefore, that Mr. Davidson was also entitled to a new trial on his guilt or innocence.
Read the majority opinion in Jerry Ray Davidson v. State of Tennessee, authored by Justice William C. Koch, Jr., and the separate opinion by Justice Wade