McClure v. Thompson
Citation | 323 F.3d 1233 |
Decision Date | 02 April 2003 |
Docket Number | No. 01-35593.,01-35593. |
Parties | Robert A. McCLURE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Frank THOMPSON, Respondent-Appellee. |
Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
Steven T. Wax, Federal Public Defender's Office, Portland, OR, for the petitioner-appellant.
Daniel J. Casey, Justice Department, State of Oregon, Salem, OR, for the respondent-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon; Ann L. Aiken, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-97-06182-ALA.
Before FERGUSON, W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and KING,* District Judge.
Opinion by Judge WILLIAM A. FLETCHER; Dissent by Judge FERGUSON.
Oregon state prisoner Robert A. McClure appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition challenging his jury trial conviction for three aggravated murders. McClure's original defense attorney, Christopher Mecca, placed an anonymous telephone call to law enforcement officials directing them to the locations of what turned out to be the bodies of two children whom McClure was ultimately convicted of killing. The district court rejected McClure's arguments that the disclosure constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, holding there was no breach of the duty of confidentiality and no actual conflict of interest. We affirm.
On Tuesday, April 24, 1984, the body of Carol Jones was found in her home in Grants Pass, Oregon. She had been struck numerous times on the head, arms and hands with a blunt object. A gun cabinet in the home had been forced open and a .44 caliber revolver was missing. Two of Jones' children — Michael, age 14, and Tanya, age 10 — were also missing. The fingerprints of Robert McClure, a friend of Jones, were found in the blood in the home. On Saturday, April 28, McClure was arrested in connection with the death of Carol Jones and the disappearance of the children.
That same day, McClure's mother contacted attorney Christopher Mecca and asked him to represent her son. As discussed in more detail below, sometime in the next three days, under circumstances described differently by McClure and Mecca, McClure revealed to Mecca the separate remote locations where the children could be found. On Tuesday, May 1, Mecca, armed with a map produced during his conversations with McClure, arranged for his secretary to place an anonymous phone call to a sheriff's department telephone number belonging to a law enforcement officer with whom Mecca had met earlier.
Later that day and the following day, sheriff's deputies located the children's bodies, which were in locations more than 60 miles apart. The children had each died from a single gunshot wound to the head. Mecca then withdrew from representation. On May 3, McClure was indicted for the murders of Carol Jones and her children. At trial, the prosecution produced extensive evidence that stemmed from the discovery of the children's bodies and introduced testimony regarding the anonymous phone call. McClure was found guilty of all three murders and was sentenced to three consecutive life sentences with 30-year minimums. On direct appeal, his conviction was affirmed without opinion. State v. McClure, 80 Or.App. 461, 721 P.2d 482 (1986), rev. denied, 302 Or. 158, 727 P.2d 128 (1986).
The parties agree that Mecca and McClure met at the jail and spoke on the telephone on a number of occasions between April 28 and May 1. However, the substance of the conversations between McClure and Mecca are the subject of significant dispute.
Mecca recorded his account in notes that he wrote immediately after the children's bodies were discovered. Mecca also gave deposition testimony for McClure's state post conviction proceeding, submitted an affidavit prior to McClure's federal habeas proceeding, and gave testimony at the federal district court evidentiary hearing in the habeas proceeding. In his notes, Mecca wrote that McClure had initially claimed that he was "being framed" for the murder, but that he was nervous about his fingerprints being in the house. He had asked Mecca to help him remove some other potential evidence, which Mecca declined to do. According to the notes, on the Sunday night after McClure's Saturday arrest, Mecca received a "frantic phone call" from McClure's sister, who was convinced that McClure had murdered Jones, but had reason to believe that the children were alive and perhaps "tied up or bound someplace." In response, Mecca set up a meeting with McClure, his sister and his mother at the jail, at which McClure's sister "directly confronted [McClure] and begged him to divulge information about the whereabouts of the kids." McClure and his sister discussed how McClure sometimes did "crazy things" when he was using drugs, but McClure strongly maintained his innocence as to Carol Jones' murder and the children's disappearance.
According to his notes, when Mecca next spoke with McClure on Monday, McClure was less adamant in his denial. Mecca described how, when they met on Monday afternoon, McClure began to tell him of his "sexual hallucinations and fantasies" involving young girls and about "other situations that happened in the past ... involving things he would do while under the influence of drugs." "It was at that time," Mecca wrote, "when I realized in my own mind that he had committed the crime and the problem regarding the children intensified." Mecca wrote that he "was extremely agitated over the fact that these children might still be alive."
After a Monday night visit to the crime scene, Mecca returned to the jail to speak with McClure again, at which time he "peeled off most of the outer layers of McClure and realized that there was no doubt in my mind that he had ... killed Carol Jones." McClure told Mecca he wanted to see a psychiatrist, then launched into "bizarre ramblings." "[E]ach time as I would try to leave," Mecca recalled in his notes, "[McClure] would spew out other information, bits about the children, and he would do it in the form of a fantasy." Mecca wrote that he "wanted to learn from him what happened to those children." He told McClure "that we all have hiding places, that we all know when we go hiking or driving or something, we all remember certain back roads and remote places," and that McClure "related to me ... one place where a body might be" and then "described [where] the other body would be located." Mecca wrote that he "wasn't going to push him for anything more," but "when I tried to leave, he said, and he said it tentatively, `would you like me to draw you a map and just give you an idea?' and I said `Yes' and he did[.]" Mecca recorded that "at that time, I felt in my own mind the children were dead, but, of course, I wasn't sure."
Very late on Monday evening, McClure telephoned Mecca at home and said, "I know who did it." Mecca recorded in his notes that the next morning he went to meet with McClure, and asked him about this statement. McClure told Mecca that "Satan killed Carol." When Mecca asked, "What about the kids?" McClure replied, "Jesus saved the kids." Mecca wrote in his notes that this statement "hit me so abruptly, I immediately assumed that if Jesus saved the kids, that the kids are alive[.]" Mecca wrote that he "kind of felt that [McClure] was talking about a sexual thing, but, in any event, I wasn't sure."
Mecca's notes indicate that on Monday, before McClure made the "Jesus saved the kids" comment, and again on Tuesday, immediately after the meeting at which he made that comment, Mecca had conversations with fellow lawyers, seeking advice regarding "the dilemma that [he] faced." After the second of these conversations, which took place Tuesday morning, Mecca arranged for a noon meeting with the undersheriff and the prosecutor. At the meeting, he "mentioned to them that I may have information which would be of interest to the State" and attempted to negotiate a plea. When the prosecutor responded that there would be no deal, Mecca recorded in his notes, (Recall that by the time Mecca wrote these notes, he had learned that the children were dead.) A law enforcement official testified in a federal court deposition that, after both the state bar association and the attorney general "recommended that it would be unwise for Mr. Mecca to provide us information," Mecca "indicated that, even though there might be sanctions, that he still was wanting to provide information that he had regarding the children." Mecca stated that when he spoke with McClure's sister and mother, they were adamant that he do whatever he could to locate the children, and that "[t]hey were still under the impression that one or both of the children were alive, or at least there was a chance they were alive."
Mecca then returned to the jail Tuesday afternoon and, according to his notes, "In any event," Mecca recorded in his notes, "he consented." "I arranged to have the information released anonymously to the Sheriff's Department with directions to the bodies." He noted that there was "no provable way to connect" McClure to the information, "but I think it's rather obvious from those in the know, who the information came from."
In the deposition conducted in conjunction with McClure's state habeas...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Commonwealth v. Tate
...such confidential information, however, if the lawyer receives the client's "informed consent" to the disclosure. See McClure v. Thompson, 323 F.3d 1233, 1244 (9th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. McClure v. Belleque, 540 U.S. 1051, 124 S.Ct. 804, 157 L.Ed.2d 701 (2003) ("[T]he mere fact of con......
-
Noguera v. Davis
...(9th Cir. 2007) (alteration in original) (quoting Hovey v. Ayers , 458 F.3d 892, 908 (9th Cir. 2006) ); see also McClure v. Thompson , 323 F.3d 1233, 1248 (9th Cir. 2003) (noting that to establish an adverse effect, a defendant "must demonstrate that his attorney made a choice between possi......
-
United States v. Hayat
...the burden of proof.8 We are mindful of the strong deference we owe the district court's credibility findings. See McClure v. Thompson, 323 F.3d 1233, 1241 (9th Cir.2003). Particularly given that deference, as well as the consideration that the issue was Cote's impartiality as a juror at th......
-
U.S.A v. Crawford
... ... other loyalties or interests." Wells, 394 ... F.3d at 733 (internal quotation marks ... omitted); see also McClure v. Thompson, ... 323 F.3d 1233, 1248 (9th Cir.2003) ("The ... client must demonstrate that his attorney ... made a choice between possible ... ...
-
Codification and Clarity: Debt Recharacterization
...See United States Courts for the Ninth Circuit, supra note 137; Anderson v. Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573 (1985); McClure v. Thompson, 323 F.3d 1233, 1240-41 (9th Cir. 2003). 149. In re SubMicron Sys. Corp., 432 F.3d at 456-57.150. Id. [T]his is a question of fact that, 'once resolved by......
-
The Legal Ethics of Real Evidence: of Child Porn on the Choirmaster's Computer and Bloody Knives Under the Stairs
...duty to deliver evidence to law enforcement, see supra Parts IV.B.2 & IV.E. 490. Wemark, 602 N.W.2d at 816. 491. McClure v. Thompson, 323 F.3d 1233, 1254 (9th Cir. 2003) (Ferguson, J., dissenting). 492. Proposed Revision to Standard 4-4.7(a), supra note...
-
A Patch with the Dev-il: How the Development of Autonomous Vehicle Software Will Challenge Attorney-Client Privilege
...case varies by jurisdiction but there are five 44. MODEL RULES R. 1.6 cmt. 6 45. MODEL RULES R. 1.6 cmt. 6 46. See McClure v. Thompson, 323 F.3d 1233, 1242 43 (9th Cir. 2003). 47. Id. at 1242. 48. Id. at 1243. 49. R.L.R v. State, 116 So. 3d 570, 574 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 2013). 50. See C......
-
Rumors of the Death of BigLaw Are Greatly Exaggerated Reviewing Mitt Regan & Lisa H. Rohrer, BigLaw: Money and Meaning in the Modern Law Firm (University of Chicago Press 2021)
...calling in the spirit of public service.” Id. at 10. 26. REGAN & ROHRER, supra note 1, at 27. 27. See generally McClure v. Thompson, 323 F.3d 1233 (9th Cir. 2003). 28. ALTON LOGAN & BERL FALBAUM, JUSTICE FAILED: HOW “LEGAL ETHICS” KEPT ME IN PRISON FOR 26 YEARS (2016). 184 THE GEORGETOWN JO......