McLaughlin v. Precythe

• Decision Date: 18 August 2021
• Docket Number: No. 18-3510,18-3510
• Citation: 9 F.4th 819
• Parties: Scott MCLAUGHLIN, Petitioner - Appellee v. Anne L. PRECYTHE, Respondent - Appellant
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

9 F.4th 819

Scott MCLAUGHLIN, Petitioner - Appellee

v.Anne L. PRECYTHE, Respondent - Appellant

No. 18-3510

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: March 17, 2021

Filed: August 18, 2021

Kent E. Gipson, LAW OFFICE OF KENT GIPSON, Kansas City, MO, Laurence E. Komp, FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, Kansas City, MO, for Petitioner - Appellee.

Scott McLaughlin, Pro Se.

Caroline Marie Coulter, Gregory Michael Goodwin, Stephen David Hawke, Michael Joseph Spillane, Assistant Attorneys General, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent - Appellant.

Before SHEPHERD, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

KOBES, Circuit Judge.

Scott McLaughlin filed this habeas action alleging (1) he received ineffective assistance of sentencing counsel when his lawyer failed to investigate potential impeachment evidence of his own expert witness; and (2) his death sentence was unconstitutional due to flaws in the jury instructions. The district court agreed and vacated his death sentence. We disagree and reverse.

I.

A.

The night before a hearing on his adult abuse charge, Scott McLaughlin ambushed his ex-girlfriend Beverly Guenther while she was leaving work. When Guenther told him to leave, McLaughlin attacked, stabbing Guenther repeatedly with a steak knife. Guenther fought for her life, scratching McLaughlin's arms and face, but he forced her to the ground and continued to stab and strangle her. Then he raped her. Once he was finished, McLaughlin threw Guenther's body into the back seat of his car and took her to the Missouri River to dispose of her remains. He couldn't dump her into the river because the brush was too thick. Instead, he left Guenther's half-naked body in the brush and drove off.

The next day, McLaughlin was "laugh[ing] and jok[ing]." App. 2336. A friend described his demeanor as "friendly" and said that the two had "nice conversations." Id. He went shopping to buy bleach and other cleaning supplies, which he said he needed to get rid of a mildew smell in his car. When he got home from shopping, McLaughlin poured the bleach inside his car.

Police came looking for McLaughlin and brought him in for questioning. They found blood on his clothes and in his car. At the station, police showed him the evidence they had against him, and McLaughlin eventually confessed and led police to Guenther's body.

The State charged McLaughlin with rape, first-degree murder, and two counts of armed criminal action and sought the death penalty. A jury convicted him of rape, first-degree murder, and one count of armed criminal action.

B.

The case moved to the penalty phase. In Missouri, when the State seeks a penalty of death after a jury conviction of first-degree murder, "a second stage of the trial shall proceed at which the only issue shall be the punishment to be assessed and declared." Mo. Ann. Stat. § 565.030.4. The trier of fact hears evidence in aggravation and mitigation of the punishment. Id. After that, the jury must find beyond a reasonable doubt that a statutory aggravator is present. Id. § 565.030.4(2). If no aggravator is present, then death cannot be assessed.

Id. If the jury finds a statutory aggravator, they move to the second step where they consider whether the evidence in mitigation is sufficient to outweigh the evidence in aggravation. Id. § 565.030.4(3). If the jury finds it is, then death cannot be assessed. Id. If the mitigation evidence does not outweigh the aggravation evidence, then the jury proceeds to the third step to "decide[ ] under all of the circumstances" whether or "not to assess and declare the punishment at death." Id. § 565.030.4(4). If they cannot, the judge must decide. Id. § 565.030.4.

The State argued four statutory aggravators: (1) the crime involved depravity of mind based on the repeated and excessive acts of physical abuse McLaughlin inflicted on Guenther; (2) the murder was committed while McLaughlin was engaged in the perpetration of forcible rape; (3) Guenther was killed because she was a potential witness in McLaughlin's burglary prosecution; and (4) Guenther was killed because she was a potential witness in an order-of-protection investigation.

In support, the State presented evidence of McLaughlin's history of stalking, harassment, and aggression towards Guenther. Following their break-up, McLaughlin repeatedly called Guenther at work, showed up at her office uninvited, and lurked outside of her home. Another time, police arrested McLaughlin for burglarizing Guenther's house. After charges were filed, McLaughlin stopped Guenther in the parking lot of her work to ask about the pending case. When Guenther told McLaughlin that she did not want to talk to him, he tried to kiss her twice. On another occasion, McLaughlin jumped from the bushes and groped her breast. Guenther reported McLaughlin was becoming more violent and aggressive as time went on.

The State also presented evidence of McLaughlin's criminal history. McLaughlin had been convicted for first-degree tampering, first-degree sexual assault against a minor, forgery, and felony nonsupport. He was also convicted of third-degree assault for attempting to cut Guenther's neighbor with a knife.

McLaughlin argued for non-statutory mitigators in his defense. He started with a discussion of his troubled childhood. McLaughlin's biological father was an alcoholic who abused his mother. He was placed in multiple foster homes. Eventually, he was placed with and adopted by Louise and Harlan McLaughlin. Harlan physically abused him. At a young age, McLaughlin was beaten with a paddle, but, as time went on, Harlan, a police officer, used a Taser and nightstick to punish him. McLaughlin also suffered emotional abuse. He and his siblings had their access to food limited by locks placed on the refrigerator and cabinet doors. McLaughlin's sister also recounted that Louise once forced McLaughlin to drown a kitten in a bucket of water.

Next, McLaughlin presented evidence from medical professionals. When McLaughlin was nine, he underwent a comprehensive mental evaluation by two doctors—Dr. Anthony Udziela and Dr. Pasquale Accardo. Both testified at the penalty phase.

Dr. Udziela talked about McLaughlin's intelligence. He noted that McLaughlin has a low IQ and suffered from significant issues related to attachment, anxiety, and mistrust associated with the neglect he suffered at a young age. He said that McLaughlin's childhood problems "markedly affected his development and had a major impact on him resulting in an adjustment disorder with depressed features." App. 2482.

Dr. Accardo testified about a neurodevelopmental assessment. The test showed that McLaughlin's language skills, common sense monitoring, and cognitive ability were all deficient. Dr. Accardo also testified that McLaughlin's attention deficit hyperactive disorder and impulsivity were neurologically based. He further said that while McLaughlin was capable of making good choices, these limitations and McLaughlin's childhood had an impact on his ability to do so. Dr. Accardo also observed that McLaughlin appeared to be suffering from depression.

McLaughlin then called Dr. Sripatt Kulkamthorn, his treating physician before the murder. Dr. Kulkamthorn testified that McLaughlin struggled with depression and anxiety. Dr. Kulkamthorn prescribed McLaughlin an antidepressant, but McLaughlin only received the pills during visits because he could not afford the prescription.

Next, Dr. Mark Cunningham, a clinical and forensic psychologist, testified about his examination of McLaughlin. Dr. Cunningham conducted interviews with McLaughlin and several members of his biological and adoptive families and reviewed McLaughlin's medical, academic, mental health, and prison records. He testified that McLaughlin had a choice when he killed Guenther, but that the choice was affected by risk and protective factors that pervaded his life, arising from his childhood and other factors.

At closing argument, McLaughlin's lawyer urged the jury to consider the "excessive" evidence in mitigation of McLaughlin's moral culpability. App. 2589. Counsel acknowledged that McLaughlin could understand the choice he made, but argued that the choice was colored by the facts and circumstances of his life.

The jury could not decide the issue of death. In a special verdict form, the jury found the existence of a statutory aggravator—depravity of mind—beyond a reasonable doubt. The jurors did not find unanimously that the mitigating factors outweighed the aggravating factors. Turning to the next step, the jury could not unanimously agree on whether death was warranted under all of the circumstances. Because the jurors were unable to agree on punishment, adjudication of the issue went to the trial judge. The judge sentenced McLaughlin to death.

McLaughlin appealed, and the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed his death sentence. State v. McLaughlin , 265 S.W.3d 257 (Mo. 2008) ( McLaughlin I ). The court found that the State's process was consistent with Ring v. Arizona , 536 U.S. 584, 589, 122 S.Ct. 2428, 153 L.Ed.2d 556 (2002), which held that "[c]apital defendants ... are entitled to a jury determination of any fact on which the legislature conditions an increase in their maximum punishment," because the jury had already found the facts necessary to make McLaughlin eligible for a death sentence. McLaughlin I , 265 S.W.3d at 264.

C.

McLaughlin filed a state habeas petition alleging that his sentencing counsel were constitutionally deficient because they failed to call a psychiatrist like Dr. Stephen Peterson, whom McLaughlin proffered in support of his petition. If counsel had done so, he claimed, the jury would have heard evidence about McLaughlin's mental state at the time he murdered Guenther. Specifically, he was under extreme mental or emotional disturbance which substantially impaired his ability to appreciate the criminality of his conduct. McLaughlin alleged that if the jury heard testimony like this, it would have...