Ineffective assistance of counsel in Mason case

[MXB]

Maurice Mason was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel in the penalty phase of his trail in violation of the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments.

Because counsel were initially not qualified to accept appointment in a capial case, the Ohio Public Defender's Office refused to provide the specialized mitigation investigation assistance to prepare for the penalty phase.

Having failed to obtain this necessary assistance, counsel subsequently failed to demonstrate to the trail court the resonable necessety of providing funds for a mitigation investigator and an experienced forensic psychologist and acquiesed in the trial court's unreasonable limitations on the scope of a mental health evaluation.

Counsel recognized - and expressed to the trial court - the need for this investigation. The trail court advised counsel to conduct the investigation on their own. Nevertheless, counsel failed to conduct the thorough and complete investigation of Mason's background and mental health history.

Counsel were therefore unable to make any reasoned or informed decision about the penalty phase of the trial.

Because of counsel's failure to thoroughly investigate Mason's background, the jury was never presented with available compelling mitigation.

[MXB]

The 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments guarantee to Maurice Mason the effective assistance of counsel at the penalty phase.

Whether the counsel's deficient performance was caused by their own lack of diligence, by trial counsel's failure to convince the trial court of the necessity of providing resources, or by the trial court's failure to provide the necessary resources is irrelevant.

The result was that counsel failed to conduct a thorough and comprehensive investigation and therefore did not have the necessary information with which to make reasoned strategic decisions about how to proceed at the penalty phase.

Counsel missed an opportunity to obtain the assistance of the public defender's office because they were not properly qualified when they accepted appointment. Once they became qualified and eventually recontacted the public defender's office, it was too late, the public defender's office was no longer able to provied the specialized mitigation investigation assistence.

Despite counsel's attempt to obtain funding for a private mitigation investigator form the court, the court denied such funding. The court advised counsel to do their own investigation or use the trail phase investigator. Counsel did neither.

Counsel's investigation for the penalty phase was limited at best, and completely inadequate. When funding was denied, counsel had an obligation to conduct the investigation on their own. They were also directed to do so by the court.

Thus the failure to conduct a thorough and complete investigation into Mason's background was the fault of counsel.