Louisiana Administrative Code
Title 22 - CORRECTIONS, CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
Part XV - Public Defender Board
Chapter 21 - Performance Standards for Attorneys Representing Juveniles in Life without Parole Cases
Section XV-2127 - Investigation

1. Counsel has an ongoing duty to conduct a high quality, independent, exhaustive investigation of all matters relevant to the guilt phase, sentencing phase, any possible agreed upon disposition, any potential claim for relief and any possible reduction of the case to a non-JLWOP prosecution. A high quality, exhaustive investigation will be prompt, thorough and independent.

2. Counsel should act promptly to ensure that the client is not prejudiced by the loss or destruction of evidence or information, whether in the form of physical evidence, records, possible witness testimony or information from a non-testifying witness. Counsel should take reasonable steps to gather and preserve evidence and information at risk of loss or destruction for later use in the case or for use by successor counsel. These steps may include retaining an expert to gather, preserve or examine evidence before it is altered or destroyed or to interview witnesses who may become unavailable. Counsel should be conscious of any procedural limitations or time bars and ensure that the investigation be conducted in a timely fashion to avoid any default or waiver of the clients rights. Similarly, counsel should be aware of or promptly become aware of the period for which relevant records are retained and ensure that the investigation be conducted in a timely fashion to avoid the destruction of relevant records.

3. The investigation relevant to the guilt phase of the trial should be conducted regardless of any admission or statement by the client concerning the facts of the alleged crime, or overwhelming evidence of guilt, or any statement by the client that evidence bearing upon guilt is not to be collected or presented.

4. The investigation relevant to the sentencing phase of the trial should be conducted regardless of any statement by the client that evidence bearing upon the penalty is not to be collected or presented. This investigation should comprise extensive and ongoing efforts to discover all reasonably available mitigating evidence and evidence to rebut any aggravating evidence or argument that may be offered by the prosecutor.

5. No area of inquiry or possible evidence in the guilt or sentencing phase investigations should be ruled out until a thorough investigation has been conducted. Counsel should seek to investigate all available evidence and information and defer strategic decisions regarding what evidence to present until after a thorough investigation has been conducted. Both at guilt and sentencing phases, counsel should not halt investigation after one seemingly meritorious defense theory has been discovered, but should continue to investigate, both following up on evidence supporting known defense theories and seeking to discover other potential defense theories.

6. Where counsel enrolls in a case in which other counsel have previously provided representation, counsel should not rely on a prior defense teams investigation or theory of the case, but rather should independently and thoroughly investigate and prepare the defense, especially where prior counsel had a conflict of interest, or there is reason to believe counsels performance was deficient.

7. Counsel are responsible for ensuring that a high quality, exhaustive investigation is conducted but are not personally responsible for performing the actual investigation. A team should be assembled containing sufficient members possessing the appropriate skills and resources to conduct a high quality and exhaustive investigation.

1. Counsel should conduct a high quality, independent and exhaustive investigation of all available sources of information utilizing all available tools including live witness interviews, compulsory process, public records law, discovery, scene visits, obtaining releases of confidential information, pre-trial litigation, the use of experts in the collection and analysis of particular kinds of evidence and audio/visual documentation. Principle sources of information in an investigation will include:

2. A high quality, independent and exhaustive investigation will include investigation to determine the existence of other evidence or witnesses corroborating or contradicting a particular piece of evidence or information.

3. A high quality, independent and exhaustive investigation will include an investigation of all sources of possible impeachment of defense and prosecution witnesses.

4. Information and evidence obtained in the investigation provided should be properly preserved by memo, written statement, affidavit, or audio/video recordings. The manner in which information is to be obtained and recorded should be specifically approved by lead counsel having regard to any discovery obligations which operate or may be triggered in the case. In particular, the decision to take signed or recorded statements from witnesses should be made in light of the possibility of disclosure of such statements through reciprocal discovery obligations. Documents and physical evidence should be obtained and preserved in a manner designed to allow for its authentication and with regard to the chain of custody.

5. A high quality, exhaustive investigation should be conducted in a manner that permits counsel to effectively impeach potential witnesses, including state actors and records custodians, with statements made during the investigation. Unless defense counsel is prepared to forgo impeachment of a witness by counsel's own testimony as to what the witness stated in an interview or to seek leave to withdraw from the case in order to present such impeaching testimony, defense counsel should avoid interviewing a prospective witness except in the presence of a third person.

6. A written record should be kept of all investigative activity on a case, including all record requests and responses and attempts to locate and interview witnesses, whether successful or unsuccessful. The written record should be sufficient to allow counsel to identify and prove, if necessary, when, where and under what circumstances each piece of information or evidence was obtained. The written record should also be sufficient to allow counsel to identify and prove that the investigation disclosed an absence of relevant information or evidence, for example, where a record custodian denies possession of relevant records or a witness denies knowledge of a relevant fact.

7. Counsel should conduct a high quality, exhaustive investigation of matters relevant to the guilt and sentencing phases, bearing in mind at all times the relevance of all information sought and obtained to each phase of the trial. Such an investigation shall extend beyond the particular client and the particular offense charged and include an investigation of:

8. Considerations in respect of particular sources of information will include the following:

9. Counsel should move promptly to ensure that all physical evidence favorable to the client is preserved, including seeking a protective court order to prevent destruction or alteration of evidence. Counsel should make a prompt request to the police or investigative agency for access to any physical evidence or expert reports relevant to the case. Counsel should examine and document the condition of any such physical evidence well in advance of trial. With the assistance of appropriate experts, counsel should reexamine all of the governments material forensic evidence, and conduct appropriate analyses of all other available forensic evidence. Counsel should investigate not only the accuracy of the results of any forensic testing but also the legitimacy of the methods used to conduct the testing and the qualifications of those responsible for the testing.

10. Counsel should take full advantage of the direct observation of relevant documents, objects, places and events by defense team members, experts and others.

11. Counsel should attempt to view the scenes of the alleged offense and other relevant events as soon as possible after counsel is assigned. The visit to any relevant scene should include visiting under circumstances as similar as possible to those existing at the time of the alleged incident (e.g., weather, time of day, and lighting conditions). Counsel should extensively, precisely and accurately document the condition of any relevant scene using the most appropriate and effective means, including, audio-visual recordings, diagrams, charts, measurements and descriptive memoranda. The condition of the scenes should always be documented in a manner that will permit counsel to identify and prove the condition of the scenes without personally becoming a witness. Where appropriate, counsel should obtain independently prepared documentation of the condition of the scenes, such as, maps, charts, property records, contemporaneous audio-visual recordings conducted by media, security cameras or law enforcement.

12. Counsel should exercise the defendants right to inspect, copy, examine, test scientifically, photograph, or otherwise reproduce books, papers, documents, photographs, tangible objects, buildings, places, or copies or portions thereof, which are within the possession, custody, or control of the state.

13. Counsel for a client with one or more co-defendants should attend hearings of co-defendants, even if the issue at stake does not seem directly relevant to the client. Counsel should be particularly interested in discovering the strength of the prosecutions case against the co-defendant and the similarities and differences between a co-defendants defense and the clients.

14. Counsel should also attend potentially relevant hearings involving state or defense witnesses.

1. Counsel should lead the defense team in a structured and supervised mitigation investigation where counsel is coordinating and, to the extent possible, integrating the strategy for sentencing with the guilt phase strategy. In doing so, counsel must ensure the defense team is adequately supported by a mitigation expert in accordance with performance standard 2115, Assembling the Defense Team.

2. Despite the integration of the two phases of the trial, counsel should be alert to the different significance of items of evidence in the two phases and direct the investigation of the evidence for the sentencing phase accordingly. Where evidence is relevant to both phases, counsel should not limit the investigation to guilt phase issues, but should further develop the mitigating evidence into a compelling case for the sentencing phase. All information obtained in the guilt phase investigation should be assessed for its significance to sentencing and where possible the guilt phase theory should reflect this assessment. Counsel should actively consider the benefits of presenting evidence admissible in the guilt phase that is also relevant in mitigation of punishment and conduct the investigation and development of evidence accordingly.

3. Counsel should direct the investigation of mitigating information as early as possible in the case. Mitigation investigation may affect many aspects of the case including the investigation of guilt phase defenses, charging decisions and related advocacy, motion practice, decisions about needs for expert evaluations, client relations and communication and plea negotiations.

4. Counsel has an ongoing duty to conduct a high quality, independent and exhaustive investigation of every aspect of the clients character, history, record and any circumstances of the offense, or other factors, which may provide a basis for a sentence less than life without parole.

5. Counsel should investigate all available sources of information and use all appropriate avenues to obtain all potentially relevant information pertaining to the client, his siblings and parents, and other family members extending back at least three generations, including but not limited to:

6. Counsel should not refrain from fully investigating potentially double-edged mitigation and such an investigation should include the full context of the mitigating evidence so as to reduce any potentially negative impact of such evidence at trial or to ensure that the mitigating effect of the evidence outweighs any negatives that may arise from the introduction of the evidence. Counsel should adopt such strategies as are necessary to reduce any potentially negative impact of such evidence, including effective Voir dire, motions in limine, limiting instructions and the presentation of other evidence designed to maximize the mitigating effect of the evidence and reduce its negative potential.

7. While the client and the clients immediate family can be very important sources of information, they are far from the only potentially significant and powerful sources of information for mitigation evidence, and counsel should not limit the investigation to the client and his or her family. Further, when evaluating information from the client and the clients family, counsel should consider any impediments each may have to self-reporting or self-reflection.

8. Counsel should exhaustively investigate evidence of any potential aggravating circumstances and other adverse evidence that may be used by the state at sentencing to determine how the evidence may be rebutted or mitigated.

9. Counsel should exhaustively investigate grounds for arguing that the state should be precluded from seeking a life without parole sentence in the case because the client is not the worst offender or the crime is not the worst offense. Grounds might include, for example, age, intellectual disability, mental illness, cognitive impairment, felony murder, guilt as a principal not directly responsible for the death or any other basis for asserting that the client is not the worst offender. When the client is charged with second degree murder, counsel should argue that the state is precluded from seeking a life without parole sentence in the case because the crime is, by definition, not the worst offense.

10. Counsel should direct team members to conduct in-person, face-to-face, one-on-one interviews with the client, the clients family, and other witnesses who are familiar with the clients life, history, or family history or who would support a sentence less than life without parole. Counsel should not fail to seek to interview any of the clients immediate family members. Multiple interviews will be necessary to establish trust, elicit sensitive information and conduct a thorough and reliable life-history investigation. Team members should endeavor to establish the rapport with the client and witnesses that will be necessary to provide the client with a defense in accordance with constitutional guarantees relevant to a Miller sentencing proceeding.

11. Counsel should direct team members to gather documentation to support the testimony of expert and lay witnesses, including, but not limited to, school, medical, employment, criminal and juvenile incarceration, and social service records, in order to provide medical, psychological, sociological, cultural or other insights into the clients mental and/or emotional state, intellectual capacity, and life history that may explain or diminish the clients culpability for his conduct, demonstrate the absence of aggressive patterns in the clients behavior, exemplify the clients immaturity due to age, explain his inability to appreciate risks and consequences, demonstrate his susceptibility to peer or familial pressure, show the clients capacity for empathy, depict the clients remorse, illustrate the clients desire to function in the world, give a favorable opinion as to the clients capacity for rehabilitation or adaptation to prison, explain possible treatment programs, rebut or explain evidence presented by the prosecutor, or otherwise support a sentence less than life without parole. Records should be reviewed as they are received by the team so that any gaps in the evidence can be discovered and filled, further areas of investigation can be uncovered and pursued, and the defense theory can properly incorporate all available documentary evidence.

12. Counsel should direct team members to provide counsel with documentary evidence of the investigation through the use of such methods as memoranda, genealogies, social history reports, chronologies and reports on relevant subjects including, but not limited to, cultural, socioeconomic, environmental, racial, and religious issues in the clients life. The manner in which information is provided to counsel is determined on a case by case basis, in consultation with counsel, considering jurisdictional practices, discovery rules and policies.

13. Counsel should ensure that the investigation develops available evidence to humanize the client in the eyes of the judge or jury, educate the jury and the court on adolescent development and the biological limitations of the adolescent mind, particularly a childs inability to appreciate risks and consequences, demonstrate the childs diminished culpability, reflect a childs unique capacity for rehabilitation, inherent dignity and value as a human being, demonstrate the clients positives and provide a basis for demonstrating these matters through factually valid narratives and exhibits, rather than merely adjectives. The investigation shall focus more broadly than identifying the causes of any offending conduct.

14. Counsel should endeavor, with the help of a mitigation expert, to create opportunities for the client to learn, grow and change during the pendency of his criminal case. A clients custodial status should not preclude counsel from seeking out such opportunities. Counsel should ensure that the client is receiving a free and appropriate education and any and all other supports and services that he is entitled to under state and federal law (including those provided in prior IEPs) and advocate to remedy any violation these laws.

15. After thorough investigation counsel should begin selecting and preparing witnesses who will testify, who may include but are not limited to:

16. Counsel should direct team members to aid in preparing and gathering demonstrative evidence, such as photographs, videotapes and physical objects (e.g., trophies, artwork, military medals), and documents that humanize the client or portray him positively, such as certificates of earned awards, favorable press accounts and letters of praise or reference.

1. Counsel should secure the assistance of experts where appropriate for:

2. An expert is retained to assist counsel in the provision of high quality legal representation. It is counsels responsibility to provide high quality legal representation and the hiring of an expert, even a well-qualified expert, will not be sufficient to discharge this responsibility. Counsel has a responsibility to support and supervise the work of an expert to ensure that it is adequate and appropriate to the circumstances of the case.

3. When selecting an expert, counsel should consult with other attorneys, mitigation specialists, investigators and experts regarding the strengths and weaknesses of available experts. Counsel should interview experts and examine their credentials and experience before hiring them, including investigating the existence of any significant impeachment that may be offered against the expert and reviewing transcripts of the experts prior testimony. If counsel discovers that a retained expert is unqualified or his opinions and testimony will be detrimental to the client, counsel should replace the expert and where appropriate, seek other expert advice.

4. When retaining an expert, counsel should provide clear information regarding the rate of payment, reimbursement of expenses, the method of billing, the timing of payment, any cap on professional fees or expenses and any other conditions of the agreement to retain. Counsel should ensure that the expert is familiar with the rules of confidentiality applicable in the circumstances and where appropriate, have the expert sign a confidentiality agreement. Counsel should monitor the hours of work performed and costs incurred by an expert to ensure that the expert does not exceed any pre-approved cap and in order to certify that the experts use of time and expenses was appropriate in the circumstances.

5. Defense counsel should normally not rely on one expert to testify on a range of subjects, particularly where the witness lacks sufficient expertise in one or more of the areas to be canvassed. Counsel should determine whether an expert is to be used as a consulting expert or may testify in the case and should make appropriate distinctions in communications with the expert and disclosure of the identity and any report of the expert to the state. Counsel should also consider whether a teaching expert is more appropriate for the case to educate the fact-finder or sentencing body. An example of the use of a teaching expert might be to educate the jury or the court on adolescent development. Counsel should use separate experts in the same field for consultation and possible testimony where the circumstances of the case make this necessary or appropriate.

6. Counsel should not simply rely on the opinions of an expert, but should seek to become sufficiently educated in the field to make a reasoned determination as to whether the hired expert is qualified, whether his or her opinion is defensible, whether another expert should be hired, and ultimately whether the area of investigation should be further pursued or abandoned.

7. Experts assisting in investigation and other preparation of the defense should be independent of the court, the state and any co-defendants. Expert work product should be maintained as confidential to the extent allowed by law. Counsel and support staff should use all available sources of information to obtain all necessary information for experts. Counsel should provide an expert with all relevant and necessary information, records, materials, access to witnesses and access to the client within sufficient time to allow the expert to complete a thorough assessment of the material provided, conduct any further investigation, formulate an opinion, communicate the opinion to counsel and be prepared for any testimony. Ordinarily, counsel should not retain an expert until a thorough investigation has been undertaken.

8. Counsel should not seek or rely upon an expert opinion in the absence of an adequate factual investigation of the matters that may inform or support an expert opinion. While an expert may be consulted for guidance even where relatively little factual investigation has been completed, counsel may not rely upon an expert opinion in limiting the scope of investigation, making final decisions about the defense theory or determining the matters to be presented to any court in the absence of a factual investigation sufficiently thorough to ensure that the experts opinion is fully informed and well supported. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of counsel, not the expert, to ensure that all relevant material is gathered and submitted to the expert for review.

9. Counsel should ensure that any expert who may testify is not exposed to privileged or confidential information beyond that which counsel is prepared to have disclosed by the witness during his or her testimony.

1. During investigation and trial preparation, counsel should develop and continually reassess a strategic plan for the case. This should include the possible defense theories for guilt phase, sentencing phase, agreed upon disposition, litigation of the case and, where appropriate, litigation of the case on appeal and post-conviction review.

2. The defense theory at trial should be an integrated defense theory that will be reinforced by its presentation at both the guilt and sentencing phases and should minimize any inconsistencies between the theories presented at each stage and humanize the client as much as possible.

3. A strategy for the case should be developed from the outset of counsels involvement in the case and continually updated as the investigation, preparation and litigation of the case proceed. Counsel should not make a final decision on the defense theory to be pursued at trial or foreclose inquiry into any available defense theory until a high quality, exhaustive, independent investigation has been conducted and the available strategic choices fully considered.

4. However, a defense theory for trial should be selected in sufficient time to allow counsel to advance that theory during all phases of the trial, including jury selection, witness preparation, motions, opening statement, presentation of evidence, closing argument and jury instructions. Similarly, the defense theory for the post-verdict, appellate and post-conviction stages of the proceedings should be selected in sufficient time to allow counsel to advance that theory in the substantive filings and hearings in the case.

5. In arriving at a defense theory counsel should weigh the positive aspects of the defense theory and also any negative effect the theory may have, including opening the door to otherwise inadmissible evidence or waiving potentially viable claims or defenses.

6. From the outset of counsels involvement in the case, a strategic planning document or documents should be produced in writing and maintained in the clients file. The strategic planning document should lay out a comprehensive strategy for both guilt and sentencing phases detailing the needed fact investigation as well as the plan for collecting and creating mitigating evidence. The plan for both guilt and mitigation investigation should include a timeline for the completion of investigatory tasks. The strategic planning document should be amended as the investigation, preparation and litigation of the case proceed to accurately reflect the current theory or theories. The strategic planning document should be made available to all members of the defense team to assist in coordinating work on the case. However, it should remain privileged and not be shared with non-team members or any team member or expert who may testify.

7. The current strategic planning document and any prior drafts of the document should be maintained in the clients file.