NEWS (3/​26/​20): Pennsylvania — The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has upheld a tri­al court rul­ing grant­i­ng a new sen­tenc­ing hear­ing to death-row pris­on­er William Housman, agree­ing that Housman’s defense coun­sel had failed to inves­ti­gate and present mit­i­gat­ing evi­dence that might have per­suad­ed his jury to spare his life. 

Housman and his co-defen­dant Beth Markman had been sen­tenced to death by a Cumberland County jury in 2001 for the mur­der of an 18-year-old Harrisburg area col­lege stu­dent. Markman’s con­vic­tion was over­turned in 2007 and she reached a plea deal with pros­e­cu­tors in 2010 in which she was sen­tenced to life without parole.

The state supreme court unan­i­mous­ly agreed that the record sup­port­ed the tri­al court’s deter­mi­na­tion that Housman had been pro­vid­ed dev­as­tat­ing­ly poor” rep­re­sen­ta­tion in the penal­ty phase. Counsel’s prej­u­di­cial­ly defi­cient per­for­mance, the court said, includ­ed fail­ing to retain or request the appoint­ment of a mit­i­ga­tion inves­ti­ga­tor, fail­ing to con­duct an inves­ti­ga­tion into Housman’s life his­to­ry, fail­ing to obtain med­ical records from a men­tal health clin­ic at which he knew Housman had been treat­ed, unrea­son­ably lim­it­ing his con­sul­ta­tion with men­tal health experts, fail­ing to present exam­ples of the per­va­sive phys­i­cal and emo­tion­al abuse Housman endured dur­ing his child­hood, and fail­ing to present evi­dence of Housman’s cognitive impairments.