Richard Samayoa v. Robert Ayers, Jr., No. 09-99001 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his death penalty verdict alleging that he had ineffective assistance of counsel where defendant's trial lawyers fell below the standard of care by not presenting the evidence of his childhood at the penalty phase of the trial. At issue was whether the state court's decision to reject the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was contrary to or an unreasonable application of U.S. Supreme Court law. The court held that the state court's decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of Supreme Court law where the state court was not unreasonable in deciding that there was no reasonable probability that the jury would have returned a different verdict had it heard the additional evidence about defendant's childhood in light of the atrociousness of defendant's double murder, the heinousness of defendant's prior crimes, and the fact that counsel had already presented significant evidence of defendant's organic brain disorder to the jury during the guilty phase.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.