Maxfield v. Cain

In determining whether a failure to present mitigation evidence at sentencing resulted in prejudice, the totality of the mitigation evidence should be weighed against aggravating evidence to determine whether there was more than a mere possibility that the information could have tended to affect the outcome. The Court engaged in a two-step analysis.

Maxfield appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Maxfield assigned error to the PCR court’s finding that his trial counsel’s failure to present mitigation evidence at sentencing did not cause prejudice. On appeal, Maxfield argued that the evidence he presented would have had an impact on whether to impose "Measure 11" mandatory minimum sentences consecutively or concurrently and therefore presenting insufficient mitigation evidence to PCR court demonstrated prejudice. In response, the State argued that much of the mitigation evidence also cut against Maxfield or was aggravating and, therefore, would not have led to a different sentence. The Court determined if the failure to present mitigation evidence at sentencing resulted in prejudice. The totality of mitigation evidence was weighed against the aggravating evidence to determine if there was more than a mere possibility the information could have affected the outcome. The Court engaged in a two-step analysis. First, the Court determined that the sentencing court had discretion as to whether to impose Maxfield’s sentences concurrently or consecutively. Aside from ORS 137.123 that grants discretion, limits to the court’s discretion is minimal. Second, the Court found that the evidence of Maxfield’s diminished capacity and culpability “create[d] more than a mere possibility that counsel’s deficient performance affected the outcome” was not outweighed by aggravation evidence. Reversed and remanded with instructions to grant post-conviction relief on petitioner’s claim that trial counsel was inadequate under Article I, section 11, for failing to adequately investigate and present mitigation evidence; otherwise affirmed.