Final Meal:
Smith requested nacho cheese doritos chips and a pepsi for his "special meal." He did not eat it. He did eat a ham, turkey and bologna sandwich Monday night. He did not eat breakfast or have a shower Tuesday.

Final Words:
In a final statement that lasted four minutes, Smith took responsibility for the crime and said he had given himself to the Lord. "I hope you have the capacity to forgive," he said, addressing the victim's grandson, Timmy Bradford, who watched with his hands clutched in front of his face. "I cannot control anything from this day. Find the right way. Be a better person than I was," Smith said.

Internet Sources:

Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (Executions)

Inmate #: 202636
Inmate: WILLIAM H SMITH
Race: Black
Gender: Male
DOB: 10/28/57
County of Conviction: Hamilton
Received at DOC: 04/15/98
Offenses: AGGRAVATED MURDER, AGGRAVATED RAPE, AGGRAVATED ROBBERY
Institution: Mansfield Correctional Institution

Ohio Adult Parole Authotity - William H. Smith Clemency Report

STATE OF OHIO
ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY
COLUMBUS, OHIO

Date of Meeting: February 8, 2005 - Date of Executive Session: February 14, 2005

Minutes of the SPECIAL MEETING of the Adult Parole Authority held at 1030 Alum Creek Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43205.

IN RE: WILLIAM H. SMITH, MANCI #202-636
SUBJECT: Death Sentence Clemency

CRIME, CONVICTION: Aggravated Murder w/ specification – Principal Offender during a Rape Offense cc/w Aggravated Murder w/ specification – Principal Offender during an Aggravated Robbery cs/w Rape cs/w Aggravated Robbery.

DATE, PLACE OF CRIME: September 26, 1987; Cincinnati, Ohio
COUNTY: Hamilton
CASE NUMBER: B-874498
VICTIM: Mary Bradford

INDICTMENT: Counts 1: Aggravated Murder with specification - Principal Offender during a Rape Offense; Count 2: Aggravated Murder with specification - Principal Offender during an Aggravated Robbery Offense; Count 3: Rape; Count 4: Aggravated Robbery.
VERDICT: Found guilty by Three Judge Panel as charged in Counts 1, 2, 3 and 4, and both specifications in Counts 1 and 2.
SENTENCE: Count 1 – Death; Count 2 – Death; Count 3 – 10-25 years CRC, with 10 years actual incarceration time; Count 4 – 10-25 years CRC, with 10 years actual incarceration time; Count 1 and 2, concurrent; Counts 3 and 4, consecutive, and consecutive with Counts 1 and 2.

ADMITTED TO INSTITUTION: April 15, 1988
TIME SERVED: 16 years, 10 months
AGE AT ADMISSION: 30 years old, (D.O.B. - 10/28/57)
CURRENT AGE: 47
JAIL TIME CREDIT: 200 Days
PRESIDING JUDGES: Honorable Norbert Nadel; Honorable Ralph Winkler; Honorable Robert Kraft.
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: Arthur M. Ney, Jr.

FOREWORD:
Clemency in the case of William H. Smith #202-636 was initiated by The Honorable Bob Taft, Governor of the State of Ohio, and the Ohio Parole Board, pursuant to Sections 2967.03 and 2967.07 of the Ohio Revised Code and the Parole Board Policy #105-PBD-05. A previous Clemency Report was sent to The Honorable George V. Voinovich, then Governor of the State of Ohio, on April 24, 1995. That report contained a unanimous Parole Board recommendation against clemency.

On January 26, 2005, the inmate’s counsel, Jennifer Kinsley, declined on behalf of Mr. Smith an opportunity to be interviewed by a representative of the Parole Board at Mansfield Correctional Institution. The Parole Board subsequently met on February 8, 2005 to hear the case of William H. Smith. The case was considered upon application by the inmate’s counsel, H. Louis Sirkin, Jennifer M. Kinsley & Laurence E. Komp. Testimony in support of clemency was presented by Mr. Smith’s counsel, Ms. Kinsley and Mr. Komp and by Mr. Smith’s cousin, Mr. Gary Dorsey representing the Smith, Dorsey, Reid, Carter, Butts & Ward families. Testimony in opposition to clemency was presented by Assistant Hamilton County Prosecutor Ronald W. Springman and by Assistant Attorneys General Henry Appel and Greg Perry. During the course of the hearing, it was determined that Mr. Smith had, in fact, desired to be interviewed by the Parole Board. At the conclusion of all testimony and rebuttal presentations, the Board adjourned to deliberate and discuss the case. It was promptly determined that Mr. Smith should be afforded an opportunity to be interviewed by the Board. As a result, an interview was rescheduled and held on February 9, 2005 with Parole Board Member Peter Davis interviewing Mr. Smith at the Mansfield Correctional Institution. On February 14, 2005 the Board reconvened to discuss the case. The Board gave careful review, consideration and discussion to all testimony, to Mr. Smith’s interview, to all available facts pertaining to the crime including voluminous supplemental materials submitted by counsel and family for Mr. Smith, by the Hamilton County Prosecutor, and by the Office of the Attorney General. Considerable discussion was had as to all credible evidence offered or adduced in mitigation. The Board deliberated extensively upon the propriety of clemency in the form of commutation and in the form of reprieve.

With eight (8) members participating, the Board voted unanimously to provide an UNFAVORABLE recommendation to the Honorable Bob Taft, Governor of the State of Ohio.

DETAILS OF THE INSTANT OFFENSE:
According to the Clemency Investigation, who sited their source as the Hamilton County Prosecutors Office, the following is known concerning the instant offense: During the evening of 9/26/87, William H. Smith met Ms. Janice Echols and her friend Ms. Mary Bradford (age 47) at the Race Inn located at 1606 Race Street in Cincinnati, Ohio. After several hours of socializing and drinking, they left this location and drove to the Queen Anne Café located at 2141 Central Avenue in Cincinnati, Ohio. At approximately 1:30 am on 9/27/87, the group left this location and the subject dropped Ms. Echols off at another bar. Mr. Smith then roceeded to the victim’s residence with her.

Mr. Smith and the victim then had sexual intercourse after drinking and allegedly using cocaine that belonged to him. The subject eventually left the victim’s apartment, but returned when he discovered that some of his cocaine was missing. Upon returning, he confronted the victim, but she denied taking any of the cocaine. He then proceeded to stab the victim approximately 10 times in the neck, right breast, and right chest. While the victim was laying on the bed bleeding to death, Mr. Smith proceeded to have intercourse with her again. He then stole 2 televisions and a stereo system belonging to the victim, and left the apartment. At approximately 4:00 pm that same day, a friend of the victim went to her apartment, and entered after finding the door unlocked. He then found the victim lying in a pool of blood on her bed, and contacted police.

The victim’s death was ruled a homicide due to multiple stab wounds to the heart, aorta, and lungs. A rape examination was also conducted that showed that the victim had vaginal intercourse. Through investigation, homicide detectives determined that William H. Smith was the last person to be seen with the victim. He was subsequently arrested at 1:30 pm on 9/28/87. The subject initially denied any involvement in the offense, but later admitted to stabbing the victim in the neck and having sex with her after stabbing her 8 more times. At the time, he claimed that this was the result of an argument over missing cigarettes and cocaine. During the argument, he claimed that the victim actually retrieved the knife, and he took it from her after striking her in the stomach.

APPLICANTS STATEMENT:
Mr. Smith was interviewed by Board Member Peter Davis on February 9, 2005 at the Mansfield Correctional Institution. Also present were Mr. Smith’s counsel Jennifer M. Kinsley and Parole Board Quality Assurance Case Analyst Matt Morris. The interview was witnessed via teleconference at Parole Board Central Office in Columbus by Mr. Smith’s counsel Laurence Komp, by Assistant Attorneys General Henry Appel and Greg Perry and by Parole Board Executive Assistant Judy Coakley.

With regard to culpability and aggravating circumstances Mr. Smith’s version of the instant offense does not differ in substantial detail from the above referenced official version as obtained from the Hamilton County Prosecutor’s office. He admits to meeting Ms. Bradford in a bar; accompanying her home; ingesting beer, vodka, marijuana and cocaine; arguing with Ms. Bradford [although not recalling the nature or subject of the argument]; wrestling the knife away from Ms. Bradford and stabbing her four (4) times; watching her lay bleeding in the living room chair; carrying her to the bedroom; removing her underpants and engaging in vaginal sex as she lay bleeding from multiple stab wounds; leaving Ms. Bradford in the bedroom [still not knowing whether she was dead or alive] as he made three (3) trips to his car to steal Ms. Bradford’s stereo and two (2) televisions; and finally leaving the apartment still not knowing whether Ms. Bradford was dead or alive. In detailing his account of the offense, Mr. Smith tearfully stated that he takes full responsibility for his inexcusable, unjustifiable and inexplicable behavior. He repeatedly remarked that he could have and should have left Ms. Bradford’s apartment at any number of times during the escalation of their verbal argument and even after he wrestled the knife from her hand. He stated that he cannot explain to himself nor to this Board why he did not leave prior to the stabbing, or immediately after the stabbing. He cannot explain to himself nor to this Board how he could or why he would rape Ms. Bradford after the stabbing, stating that he had never forced sexual conduct on any woman before that night. He cannot explain why he decided to steal Ms. Bradford’s stereo and televisions and take them to his mother’s house. He offered no excuses or rationalization for his offense behavior other than being “stupid and dumb”. He also characterized as “stupid and dumb” his sending a fabricated letter to Ms. Bradford’s daughter during his first year of incarceration, falsely asserting his innocence and falsely accusing a “Ricky Johnson” as Ms. Bradford’s killer. He stated that it was after Death Row was moved from Lucasville to Mansfield in late 1994 that he finally “came clean” and began to tell the truth to himself and to others about his sole responsibility for Ms. Bradford’s murder, rape and robbery.

PRIOR RECORD:

JUVENILE:
1/26/73 Robbery Juvenile Court Official probation; (Age 15)
7/29/1973 Breaking & Juvenile Court Official probation, restitution, (Age 15)
12/27/73 Burglary Juvenile Court Restitution, (Age 16) referred to Job Corps.
7/2/74 Unauthorized Use of Vehicle Juvenile Court Official probation, (Age 16) $20 fine and court costs.
OTHER ADJUDICATIONS: In 1973, the subject was arrested for being incorrigible. In 1974, he was arrested for being unruly and questionable conduct. All of these convictions resulted in court costs being remitted or a continuance of probation.

ADULT:
11/14/75 Breaking & Entering, Cincinnati, Ohio 8/19/76; 6 months to 5 years (Age 18)Suspended; fines, costs, (B753893) restitution and 2 years probation, concurrent with date of arrest for 5/5/76.
8/7/78: Guilty of probation violation, restored and continued on probation for an additional 3 years.
3/26/79; Declared an Absconder due to whereabouts being unknown.
7/29/80; Guilty of probation violation, sentenced to 6 months to 5 years, OSR.
8/20/80: Admitted to OSR #112-988; Paroled. 3/21/82; Details: District One Police observed the subject and an accomplice removing copper pipe from a building at 1332 Race Street. This building belonged to the Estate of Vincent Westerdorf.
3/17/76 Theft Cincinnati Ohio 4/19/76; 10 days workhouse (Age 18) (Under $150) and court costs. Details: Subject removed copper pipes from a building at 1625 Republic Street.
5/5/76 Breaking & Entering, Cincinnati, Ohio 8/19/76: 6 months–5 years, (Age 18) Entering suspended, 2 years probation (B761494) concurrent with date of arrest of 11/14/75.
8/7/78: Guilty of probation violation, restored and continued on probation for an additional 3 years.
3/26/79: Entry declaring subject an absconder from probation due to whereabouts unknown. 7/31/80: Details: Subject broke into an apartment of Fred Wright, 1614 Elm Street, Cincinnati, Ohio.
5/18/77 Assault Cincinnati, Ohio 6/17/77; 180 days workhouse (Age 19) 15 days suspended. Details: Subject followed Charles Bishop to his residence, at 1216 Race Street. Subject asked the victim for ten (10) cents. When the victim said that he had no money, subject began beating the victim on the left side of his face.
8/26/85 Breaking & Entering, Cincinnati, Ohio 10/28/85: 1 year Ohio Penitentiary; (Age 27) 6/27/86: Released. Details: Subject broke into a residence at 3248 Glendora Avenue, and removed two (2) stained glass windows.

9/28/87 Aggravated Murder w/ specification (2 counts), cs/w Rape, cs/w Aggravated Robbery, Cincinnati, Ohio (Age 29)

OTHER CONVICTIONS:
Subject has four (4) other convictions. In 1979, he was arrested for Engaging in Gambling, which resulted in fines and being ordered to pay court costs. In 1984, he was charged with No Driver’s License on two (2) occasions for which he was fined and ordered to pay court costs. In 1987, the subject was arrested for Possession of a Dangerous Drug, which resulted in five (5) days at the Hamilton County Criminal Justice Center and costs remitted.

DISMISSED/NOLLED AND/OR UNKNOWN DISPOSITION CHARGES:
In 1978, the subject was arrested in Hamilton County for Aggravated Burglary, a charge which was ignored by the Grand Jury. In 1984, he was arrested for Criminal Damaging, which was dismissed. In 1985, the subject was arrested by the Fulton County Police Department in Atlanta, Georgia, on two (2) charges of Simple Battery and Disturbing a Lawful Gathering. Both of these charges were subsequently dismissed.

INSTITUTIONAL ADJUSTMENT:
Mr. Smith has spent approximately 17 years on Death Row. He has demonstrated good institutional conduct with only two (2) relatively minor disciplinary tickets, and none during the past ten (10) years. He also has maintained good job evaluations and enjoys a good rapport with correctional officers and other institutional staff. His institutional adjustment has been exemplary.

COUNSEL’S ARGUMENTS FOR CLEMENCY:
Counsel for Mr. Smith assert six (6) arguments in support of mitigation against the imposition of the death penalty in this case.

1. Poor Representation of Trial Counsel During Penalty Hearing
We note that many of the alleged deficient actions of Mr. Smith’s trial counsel were within their proper discretion as matters of defense trial strategy. The Board defers to the substantive findings of the Federal District Court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in their rejection of Mr. Smith’s claim that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

2. Organic Brain Damage
Mr. Smith has never been diagnosed with a major mental illness, nor with a serious mental defect, nor with an organic brain disease. There is clear and convincing evidence that at the time of the offense Mr. Smith suffered from a personality disorder characterized by poor impulse control. There is credible evidence that he was diagnosed [post conviction in 1992] with “mild static diffuse cerebral dysfunction”, occasioned by either “chronic alcohol abuse” or “traumatic brain damage”. It is noted that the diagnosing clinical psychologist [Dr. Kathleen J. Burch] did not identify any major head injuries to Mr. Smith & effectively corroborated the finding in Dr. Nancy Schmidtgoessling’s mitigation report that Mr. Smith’s primary mental deficit was poor impulse control. Moreover, during the February 9, 2005 interview, Mr. Smith stated that he has not suffered any head trauma since his sister hit him in the top of his head with a “coke bottle” during a weekend home visit from Longview State Hospital [sometime between the ages of 9 & 14].

Counsel asserts that Mr. Smith’s recent cranial CAT scan [one of a battery of physiological exams occasioned by Mr. Smith’s treatment for heart attack symptoms] indicates the presence of an abnormality or mass in his brain [specifically between his seventh and eighth cranial nerve]. Reportedly the treating physician at Mansfield General Hospital & a neuroradiologist consulted by Mr. Smith’s attorneys [Dr. Clifford Pleatman] recommend a follow-up MRI to obtain a more complete diagnosis. This is the basis for counsel’s alternate request for clemency in the form of a reprieve. It should be noted that Mr. Smith’s medical records in this regard were not made available to State’s counsel nor to this Board at the time of the February 8, 2005 hearing. Absent a copy of any medical report, State’s counsel presented a compelling affidavit from Dr. Richard Lederman, [Cleveland Clinic Department of Neurology] stating in pertinent part: “The seventh cranial nerve primarily controls the function of facial muscles and taste from the tongue. The eighth cranial nerve primarily relays sound and balance information from the inner and middle ear to the brain.”

“If Dr. Pleatman is suggesting that the seventh and eighth cranial nerves are in Mr. Smith’s brain, he is mistaken. The seventh and eighth cranial nerves are, by definition, not part of the brain, although these nerve fibers originate and terminate in the brain.” “Assuming that the abnormality in the seventh and eight cranial nerves is very severe, Mr. Smith would likely suffer facial paralysis on one side of his face and total deafness in one ear.” “It is my opinion that any such an abnormality --- no matter how severe --- would not affect an individuals ability to tell right from wrong. Nor would such an abnormality affect an individual’s ability to conform his conduct to the requirement of the law. “ A copy of Mr. Smith’s Emergency Department Reports from Mansfield General Hospital dated December 9, 2004 and December 29, 2004 were given to this Board by counsel after the interview of Mr. Smith on February 9, 2005. An actual copy of the CAT scan was not included. Relevant portions of the December 29, 2004 report CAT scan summary include the following: “The ventricles are symmetric in size, position and configuration. There is no convincing evidence of intracranial mass or hemorrhage. There are small areas of increased attenuation demonstrated in the basal ganglia bilaterally which likely represent calcifications within the basal ganglion as they are symmetric. There is no evidence of midline shift. There is no evidence of extra-axial collection. Bone windows reveal no evidence of fracture. There is mucosal sinus disease evident within the left frontal and bilateral ethmoid sinuses.”

“IMPRESSION: 1. No evidence of intracranial mass or hemorrhage. 2. Areas of increased attenuation within the bilateral basal ganglia which likely represent physiologic calcifications. 3. Bilateral ethmoid and left frontal mucosal sinus disease. “ “I recommend further evaluation of this patient with an MRI examination of the brain.” This Board holds the view that any necessary follow-up MRI examination for Mr. Smith is strictly a medical decision, properly and exclusively within the discretionary authority of the Medical Director at the Mansfield Correctional Institution in consultation with the Medical Director for the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. The Board recognizes that credible evidence of Mr. Smith’s diagnoses of poor impulse control and “mild static diffuse cerebral dysfunction” is a proper consideration to be weighed in the pursuit of a claim for mercy.

3. Deprived Childhood
This Board concurs with the findings of the Supreme Court of Ohio in recognizing that Mr. Smith’s “history, character, and background do offer mitigating features. Smith clearly had an arduous childhood, and his early life shaped a personality with serious character defects. His limited mental capacity, childhood deprivation, and alcohol and drug dependency all reflect mitigating features.” Mr. Smith’s abysmal childhood, as comprehensively detailed in the penalty phase mitigation report compiled by Dr. Nancy Schmidtgoessling, Ph.D., is a significant consideration to be weighed in the pursuit of a claim for mercy.

4. Good Institutional Adjustment
As previously noted, this Board finds Mr. Smith’s overall institutional adjustment to be exemplary and a proper consideration to be weighed in the pursuit of a claim for mercy.

5. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Dissenting Opinion
In Mr. Smith’s claim for federal habeas relief, Judge Guy Cole rendered a dissenting opinion on the narrow grounds that Mr. Smith was denied the full benefit of expert psychiatric assistance during the sentencing phase, noting that Dr. Nancy Schmidtgoessling was appointed by the court as an amicus “neutral” expert rather than as a “defense” expert. This Board offers no comment on the legal merits of Judge Cole’s argument as to the applicability of prior case law in support of his dissenting opinion. The Board does take note, however, that Judge Cole did not dissent from the majority’s finding that Mr. Smith received effective assistance of trial counsel. We concur with the following argument advanced by the Attorney General: “In concurring with the District Court that Smith’s trial counsel effectively represented him, the Sixth Circuit found that extensive mitigation was presented via Dr. Schmidtgoessling’s testimony and her mitigation report presented into evidence by the defense described in greater detail Smith’s family background, developmental history, his commitment, and his later functioning as a young adult. Finally, the Sixth Circuit concluded that Smith failed to identify any significant evidence that was overlooked by counsel and not presented to the trial court.”

6. Racial Discrimination in Grand Jury Process
This Board was presented with insufficient credible evidence with which to form an opinion as to whether the Hamilton County Grand Jury process was unconstitutionally deficient at the time of Mr. Smith’s offense, due to an alleged pattern or practice of racial discrimination in the selection of the Grand Jury forepersons. We defer to the unanimous opinion of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals who rejected this claim on the merits.

CONCLUSION:
The Board acknowledges the following mitigating factors: 1. Mr. Smith suffered an abysmal childhood of deprivation and abuse. 2. Mr. Smith’s sincere, genuine and strong expression of remorse. 3. At the time of the offense, Mr. Smith suffered from a personality disorder that may have manifested in a loss of impulse control with regard to the killing of Ms. Bradford. 4. Mr. Smith has demonstrated exemplary conduct and adjustment within a structured prison setting.

After careful, extensive deliberation and discussion, the Board finds that the aforementioned mitigating factors do not outweigh the non-impulsive aggravating circumstances of Mr. Smith’s prolonged victimization of Ms. Bradford: raping her as she lay bleeding and near death from multiple stab wounds and then making multiple trips from her apartment to his car to steal her stereo and televisions. This callous victimization continued even into the first year of Mr. Smith’s incarceration by his deceitful, self-serving letter to one of Ms. Bradford’s daughters. The only relevant mental defect is “poor impulse control”. But impulsivity alone does not explain the aggravating circumstances of this brutal crime. A wretched childhood, an impulsive character defect, good prison conduct and belated but sincere expression of remorse are simply not sufficient to overcome the magnitude of aggravating circumstances in this case. A sufficient justifiable basis for mercy cannot be found. There is no manifest miscarriage of justice in the imposition of sentence. The Board deliberated extensively upon the propriety of clemency in the form of commutation and in the form of reprieve.

With eight (8) members participating, the Board voted unanimously to provide an UNFAVORABLE recommendation, both as to commutation and as to reprieve, to the Honorable Bob Taft, Governor of the State of Ohio.

ProDeathPenalty.Com

On 9/26/87, William Smith murdered 47-year-old Mary Bradford in her Cincinnati apartment. Ms. Bradford had met Smith that evening at a local bar. Smith stabbed Ms. Bradford in the stomach, raped her and then fatally stabbed her nine more times. Smith then made four separate trips to take Ms. Bradford's property from her house to his car. Smith later confessed to police.

Cleveland Plain Dealer

"Killer loses bid to delay execution for '87 crime," by John Nolan. (AP March 8, 2005)

LUCASVILLE, Ohio (AP) — A man who claims he has a brain abnormality lost a request to a federal appeals court seeking to delay his execution scheduled for today for raping and killing a woman he met at a bar.

An appeal filed Monday to the U.S. Supreme Court for William H. Smith was the defense's last attempt to escape the sentence. Smith, 47, claims the abnormality detected during a brain scan after he fainted in prison may have affected his behavior in 1987 when he stabbed a woman, raped her as she lay dying and then made three trips to his car to steal her stereo and two television sets.

Thirteen judges from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed Monday with a three-judge panel that lifted a stay of execution, saying that two brain tests did not prove Smith has an abnormality. The appeals court said the defense introduced no new issues that warrant reconsideration of the sentence and rejected the argument that Smith's trial lawyers failed to develop evidence that he had brain damage.

National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

William Henry Smith - Ohio - March 8, 2005

The state of Ohio is set to execute William H. Smith, a 47 year old African American man on March 8 for the 1987 rape and murder of Mary Virginia Bradford in Hamilton County.

On the evening of Sept. 26, 1987, Ms. Bradford went to a bar near her apartment in Cincinnati. Two days later, her boyfriend found her dead in her home of apparent stab wounds. Police tracked the murder to Smith, who met Ms. Bradford at the bar on the night of the 26th. Smith admitted that he drove Ms. Bradford home, returning later to retrieve some drugs he accidentally left in her possession. When he inquired of Ms. Bradford where he could find the cocaine he left in her apartment, she stated that her boyfriend took it. Angry at the idea of losing several thousand dollars worth of drugs, Smith lashed out at Ms. Bradford. He was convicted in October of 1987 for her murder and rape and sentenced to death.

Smith experienced what court psychiatrist Dr. Schmidtgoessling characterized as a “bizarre” childhood. His mother had a history of mental illness, and she and his stepfather abused Smith and his siblings. As a child, Smith lived in foster care and spent several years at a state mental facility where he was diagnosed with an emotionally unstable personality and borderline intellectual functioning levels. Smith was given antipsychotic drugs and electric shock therapy as treatment. His deviant lifestyle continued into his teens; Smith began smoking marijuana at age 11 and started drinking alcohol at age 15. His IQ has been tested at 78, and he has organic brain damage, a fact not known at his original trial.

One of the biggest concerns in this case is the lack of a defense psychiatry expert at Smith’s trial. In October of 2003, Smith’s request for a writ of habeas corpus was denied by a 2-1 vote by the U.S. Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit. Appeals Judge R. Guy Cole, Jr., in his dissenting opinion, voiced his concern that if Smith had the mental health expert to which he was legally entitled, his sentence would not have resulted in death.

Previous courts have decided that the defense is entitled to a psychiatric expert in cases of questionable mental health. However, Smith’s trial included testimony by Dr. Schmidtgoessling, who functioned as a “friend of the court.” This had serious legal consequences for Smith’s case. Because Dr. Schmidtgoessling was not acting as an advocate for Smith, her evaluation did not look for mitigating factors to spare his life during the sentencing portion of the trial. Judge Cole noted that defendants like Smith are entitled access to a competent psychiatric expert who will assist in the evaluation, preparation, and presentation of the defense. By her own accord, Dr. Schmidtgoessling acknowledged that she did not do this. Judge Cole concludes that had Smith been given a defense rather than neutral expert, there would have been sufficient mitigating evidence presented to spare his life.

William Smith was denied his constitutional right to a fair trial. His trial attorneys and the court system failed him in not securing a defense psychiatric expert to attest to his horrific childhood and mental illness. During his 17 years on death row, Smith has been a model prisoner and continues to suffer from his mental illness and brain damage. The state of Ohio must not execute this man.

Ohioans to Stop Executions

Overview

Crime: Sentenced in April of 1988 by a 3 judge panel for the death of Mary Bradford in Sept of 1987.
The Case: The record notes, Mr. Smith and Ms Bradford met at a bar [the Race Inn in OTR Cincinnati] She was found the next day having been stabbed to death. After waiving his Miranda rights, the police record has Smith [in an unsworn statement] admitting to the crime saying: they say he had left her apt when her boyfriend arrived and forgot a small amount of cocaine – when he returned the boyfriend had taken the cocaine so they discussed “restitution.” [Which involved sex and electronics] At one point an argument began and Ms Bradford got a knife from the kitchen, she was stabbed during a struggle.

Mitigation / Talking Points

MR. SMITH’S MENTAL HEALTH SHOULD DISQUALIFY HIM FROM THE DEATH PENALTY.

Background on Mr. Smith’s life
Mr. Smith grew up in various foster homes from when he was 11 months until 10 years. He spent 3 years in Longview State Hospital [while there he was prescribed antipsychotic medication and remembers being given shock treatment.]. His IQ is 78 and he is prone to depression. He was diagnosed with emotional unstable personality and borderline intellectual functioning. His mother had a history of mental illness and was diagnosed with schizophrenia. She was abusive to her children – often beating them or hiding food. His stepfather was also hospitalized for psychiatric problems and was incarcerated for rape.

Legal Concerns

MR. SMITH SHOULD HAVE HAD HIS OWN PSYCHIATRIST IN COURT.

Smith’s initial plea was not guilty by reason of insanity. In Federal 6th Circuit Judge R. Guy Cole, Jr., dissent he notes, “I believe that the trial court failed to provide Smith with a mental health expert for the defense.” [As required by Ake, and as interpreted by Powell v. Collins, 328 F. 3d 268 (6th Cir 2003)]

IF THE STATE IS GOING TO TRY POOR PEOPLE, IT MUST PROVIDE ADEQUTE DEFENSE. Other Court references in Cole’s dissent: Criminal trials are fundamentally unfair “if a state proceeds against an indigent defendant without making certain that he has access to the raw materials integral to building a defense.” [Terry, 985 F.2d at 284] “When the state has made the defendant’s mental condition relevant to his criminal culpability and to the punishment he might suffer, the assistance of a psychiatrist may well be crucial to the defendants ability to marshal his defense.” [Ake, 470 US 68 (1985)] Ake “does not mean the right to place the report of a ‘neutral’ psychiatrist before the court; rather it means the right to use the services of a psychiatrist in whatever capacity defense counsel deems appropriate.” [US v. Sloan, 776 F.2d 926, 929 (10th Cir. 1985)]

Mr. Smith’s defense team argues:
IN CASES OF LIFE AND DEATH, DEFENSE COUNSEL MUST BE ADEQUATE AND EFFECTIVE – SMITH’S WERE NEITHER. Ineffective assistance of trial counsel Trial counsel were ineffective in working with the mitigation specialist from the Ohio Public Defenders Office, working with the psychiatrist, investigating Smith’s background, developing strategy and requesting full psychiatric exam. Additionally, they allowed his mother and pastor to present damaging information to the court.

IF THE PROSECUTOR’S CHOOSE LIFE AND DEATH PUNISHMENTS – THEY SHOULD PLAY FAIR. Prosecutorial Misconduct Race pervading the charging decision: “Smith, who is African American, argues that the ad hoc policies adopted by the Hamilton County Prosecutor’s Office reflects a racial bias in charging and prosecuting capital offenses. Since Ohio’s current death penalty law became effective in 1981, roughly 62% of the death sentences in Hamilton County have been imposed upon African-Americans even though they consist of only 20% of the county’s population.” Misconduct during Culpability phase and mitigation phase” “Smith contends that during the guilt phase, the prosecutor introduced victim-impact evidence, engaged in improper argument, failed to disclose favorable impeachment evidence ….. Smith objects to the prosecutor’s statement during mitigation that Smith lacked remorse and that he could not meet the insanity standard and therefore no mitigating factors were present.

Dayton Daily News

"State executes killer who tried to prove brain damage" (March 8, 2005)

LUCASVILLE, Ohio - A murderer who said a brain abnormality may have affected his behavior when he stabbed then raped a bleeding woman was executed Tuesday after courts decided tests did not prove brain damage. William H. Smith, 47, died by injection at 10:19 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility for the death of Mary Bradford, whom he met at a bar in 1987.

The defense did not challenge Smith's conviction but said a brain lesion detected after he fainted in prison could have spared him from the death sentence at his 1988 trial.

In a final statement that lasted four minutes, Smith took responsibility for the crime and said he had given himself to the Lord. "I hope you have the capacity to forgive," he said, addressing the victim's grandson, Timmy Bradford, who watched with his hands clutched in front of his face. "I cannot control anything from this day. Find the right way. Be a better person than I was," Smith said. Smith was upbeat before the execution, visiting family, chatting about Cincinnati sports with the execution team and sharing a cherry cake recipe with them, a prisons spokeswoman said.

Smith and Bradford drank together at the bar for several hours before going to her Cincinnati apartment, where they used cocaine and had sex, police said. The two argued when Smith accused Bradford of owing him money for cocaine. Smith, also of Cincinnati, told police he grabbed a knife away from Bradford, and she was stabbed during the struggle. Bradford, 47, had 10 stab wounds in the neck and chest, and Smith had sex with her again as she lay on her bed bleeding, police said. He then made three trips to his car to steal her stereo and two television sets, police said.

Reuters News

"Ohio Executes Convicted Murderer." (Tue Mar 8, 2005 11:30 AM ET )

CINCINNATI (Reuters) - The state of Ohio on Tuesday executed a 47-year-old man convicted of killing a woman in 1987, after a court rejected a claim that he suffered from brain damage. William Smith was pronounced dead at 10:19 a.m. EST following an injection of lethal drugs at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility in Lucasville, according to Kim Norris, a spokeswoman for the attorney general of Ohio.

Smith was convicted of the stabbing murder of Mary Bradford, 47, whom he also raped and robbed in her Cincinnati apartment after they had met in a bar. The execution was the seventh in the United States this year and the 951st since the country brought back the death penalty in 1976. Smith admitted that he stabbed Bradford about 10 times during an argument over cocaine and cigarettes, which he claimed she took from him. Prosecutors alleged that he raped her after the knife attack and then stole two television sets and a stereo from her apartment.

The Ohio Parole Board unanimously upheld his sentence, but a federal district judge in Cincinnati had stayed his execution on grounds that the state did not thoroughly investigate his claim that his behavior was affected by brain damage. An appellate court overturned the stay earlier in the week, saying a scan failed to confirm such damage.

Smith was offered a special meal on the evening before his execution. He chose a large bag of cheese-flavored corn chips and a soft drink.

Channel 5 Cincinnati

"Killer's Execution No Closure For Victim's Daughter; After 17 Years, Bradford Still Keeps Mother Close To Her Heart." (March 8, 2005)

CINCINNATI -- The man who raped, robbed and killed her mother 17 years ago was executed Tuesday, bringing up both horrifying and happy memories for Glenda Bradford. Happy because Bradford, now a mother of five herself, holds her mother, Mary, tightly in her heart. "I miss her. She was beautiful to me," Bradford said in her only local interview with News 5's Juliette Vara.

Bradford treasures a small, aged photo, about the only picture she has of her mother. "The most wonderful person I ever met, not because she was my mother, but because of her heart. She has left me with that," Bradford said. Horrifying because of the circumstances of her mother's death.

On Sunday, Sept. 27, 1987, Bradford was expecting her mother for dinner when there was a knock on the door. It was the police with news that her mother had been raped and murdered inside her Over-the-Rhine apartment. William Smith stabbed Mary Bradford about 10 times, then raped her as she lay in a pool of blood bleeding to death.

"I'm trying to live it, to be there, to imagine how she felt and what was on her mind," Bradford said. But it's too hard. "It was about what he wanted. He saw money and he saw that he could have something more," Bradford said. Bradford said Smith has never made contact with her family or apologized for what he did.

Today, after numerous failed appeals, Smith died at 10:19 a.m. by lethal injection. Bradford fights back tears, yet admits Smith's execution will not bring closure or justice. Nothing ever will. Her nephew planned to drive up to Lucasville to represent the family at the execution. Bradford didn't go. It wasn't in her heart.

Chillicothe Gazette

"Cincinnati man executed for 1987 stabbing death; Smith's brain damage claim falls short," by Anita Chang. (AP March 8, 2005) LUCASVILLE — A murderer who said a brain abnormality may have affected his behavior when he stabbed then raped a bleeding woman was executed Tuesday after courts decided tests did not prove brain damage. William H. Smith, 47, died by injection at 10:19 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility for the death of Mary Bradford, whom he met at a bar in 1987. The defense did not challenge Smith’s conviction but said a brain lesion detected after he fainted in prison could have spared him from the death sentence at his 1988 trial.

In a final statement that lasted four minutes, Smith took responsibility for the crime and said he had given himself to the Lord. “I hope you have the capacity to forgive,” he said, addressing the victim’s grandson, Timmy Bradford, who watched with his hands clutched in front of his face. “I cannot control anything from this day. Find the right way. Be a better person than I was,” Smith said. Smith was upbeat before the execution, visiting family, chatting about Cincinnati sports with the execution team and sharing a cherry cake recipe with them, a prisons spokeswoman said.

Smith and Bradford drank together at the bar for several hours before going to her Cincinnati apartment, where they used cocaine and had sex, police said. The two argued when Smith accused Bradford of owing him money for cocaine. Smith, also of Cincinnati, told police he grabbed a knife away from Bradford, and she was stabbed during the struggle. Bradford, 47, had 10 stab wounds in the neck and chest, and Smith had sex with her again as she lay on her bed bleeding, police said. He then made three trips to his car to steal her stereo and two television sets, police said.

WCPO.Com

"Man Executed For 1987 Cincy Murder." (3/8/2005 10:44:09 AM)

A murderer who said a brain abnormality may have affected his behavior when he stabbed then raped a bleeding woman was executed Tuesday after courts decided tests did not prove brain damage. William H. Smith, 47, died by injection at 10:19 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility for the death of Mary Bradford, whom he met at a bar in 1987.

The defense did not challenge Smith's conviction but said a brain lesion detected after he fainted in prison could have spared him from the death sentence at his 1988 trial. In a final statement that lasted four minutes, Smith took responsibility for the crime and said he had given himself to the Lord. "I hope you have the capacity to forgive," he said, addressing the victim's grandson, Timmy Bradford, who watched with his hands clutched in front of his face. "I cannot control anything from this day. Find the right way. Be a better person than I was," Smith said. Smith was upbeat before the execution, visiting family, chatting about Cincinnati sports with the execution team and sharing a cherry cake recipe with them, a prisons spokeswoman said.

Smith and Bradford drank together at the bar for several hours before going to her Cincinnati apartment, where they used cocaine and had sex, police said. The two argued when Smith accused Bradford of owing him money for cocaine. Smith, also of Cincinnati, told police he grabbed a knife away from Bradford, and she was stabbed during the struggle. Bradford, 47, had 10 stab wounds in the neck and chest, and Smith had sex with her again as she lay on her bed bleeding, police said. He then made three trips to his car to steal her stereo and two television sets, police said. State v. Smith Ohio,1991.

State v. Smith, 61 Ohio St.3d 284, 574 N.E.2d 510, (Ohio 1991). (Direct Appeal)

Defendant was convicted in the Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, of two counts of aggravated murder and was sentenced to death. Defendant appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Appeal was taken. The Supreme Court, Alice Robie Resnick, J., held that: (1) evidence indicated that defendant's confession was voluntary; (2) defendant's confession and physical evidence supported finding that defendant raped, robbed, and murdered victim; and (3) aggravating circumstances of rape and robbery of helpless woman in her own home outweighed any mitigating factors in defendant's upbringing. Affirmed.

On Saturday afternoon, September 26, 1987, Mary Virginia Bradford, age forty-seven, visited the Race Inn, a neighborhood bar in Cincinnati, Ohio. While at the Race Inn, she had several beers and met, talked, and danced with William H. Smith, appellant, a regular bar patron. She left the Race Inn around 11:45 p.m. Around 4:00 p.m., on September 27, Marvin Rhodes, Bradford's boyfriend, stopped by her apartment because he had not seen her since Friday, September 25. No one answered the doorbell, but Rhodes found the door unlocked and went in. Rhodes saw blood near the front door and found Bradford in the bedroom. Feeling her face, he found no life in her body and called the police.

Responding police officers found Bradford lying stabbed to death on her bed, nude from the waist down. On the floor, near her bed, police found a woman's pants and panties, bloodstained and turned inside out, and, on the bed, an oxygen machine used by asthmatics. Forensic examination disclosed a .13 percent blood-alcohol level and revealed sperm in her vagina and on her abdomen.

Near the front door of the apartment, police found a chair, with a pool of blood in it, and, on the floor, blood smears including a bare bloody footprint leading to the bedroom. The apartment was otherwise exceptionally neat and clean, with no signs of disorder, disarray, or a struggle, and police found no murder weapon in the apartment. One color television, one black and white television, and a stack stereo with two speakers were missing from Bradford's apartment.

Dr. Harry J. Bonnell, Chief Deputy Coroner, testified that Bradford died as a result of ten stab wounds to her upper body and consequent loss of blood. She was five feet, three inches tall, weighed one hundred sixteen pounds, and a portion of her lungs was missing, which explained her asthmatic condition. Bonnell numbered the wounds one to ten for descriptive purposes (but not indicative of the order in which inflicted). The most lethal wounds, causing incapacitation within five minutes, were wound eight, a four-inch wound into Bradford's right lung and heart, and wound nine, a four-inch wound into the sternum and the heart's right ventricle. Wound seven, a five-inch puncture into the rib and liver, and wounds eight and nine all fractured bony structures. Wound two, four inches in depth, crossed her neck from left to right. Wound ten punctured the liver and was no more than four inches in depth. Two wounds, one and five, showed no signs of hemorrhage and thus were inflicted after death or when the heart was not pumping sufficient blood. Wounds one, three, four, and six were superficial. Bradford's body exhibited no other evidence of injury or trauma such as bruises or defense wounds, and Bonnell observed no twisting motion in the stab wounds that would indicate a violent struggle. All the wounds could have been inflicted by the same, single edged knife.

On September 28, 1987 homicide detectives went to where Smith lived, the home of Bertha Reid, Smith's mother, which was about four blocks from Bradford's house. When police arrived, Smith was not at home, and Reid let the officers in. While at Reid's home, police noticed a television set matching the description of one of the two sets missing from Bradford's home. Thereafter, police secured a warrant, found the missing two televisions in Reid's home, and seized them.

Reid testified that when her son came home around 2:00 a.m. on September 27, he did not act unusual, nor did he appear to be drunk, high, or upset. However, Smith did carry into Reid's home the two televisions in question along with a large stereo system and two speakers. Reid asked where he got the televisions and stereo, and Smith replied that his girlfriend Carolyn gave them to him. Reid did not accept her son's explanation, telling him he would "have to explain to me a little more about what's going on." Later that morning, Smith and his cousin, Greg, took the stereo and two speakers away but left the televisions. Reid also showed police clothing that her son had worn on September 26 and 27, which police seized. Subsequent forensic analysis revealed that Smith's shirt and shoes bore traces of human blood.

On September 28, 1987, police apprehended and took Smith to police headquarters for questioning. After being advised of his rights, Smith agreed to talk to police. Smith initially asserted that he had driven Bradford home that night but had just dropped her off. He later admitted that he had been in her apartment but had left when her boyfriend arrived. Smith told police that he met Bradford at the Race Inn, later drove her and her girlfriend to another bar, and then drove Bradford home. While at her house, Smith claimed that someone he thought to be Bradford's boyfriend arrived, and Smith decided to leave quickly. After Smith left, he realized that he had left a packet of cocaine, worth $2,500, at Bradford's house. After he returned, Bradford's boyfriend and the cocaine were both gone. Smith then talked with Bradford.

" * * * [W]e talked about restitution, you know. She said she'd give me some of that body. I said okay, it's good enough for me, you know, but then after I got that [had sex with her] it wasn't good enough, you know, so I asked her like you got any money and stuff, you know. She said she ain't have no money. So we start arguing and stuff and next thing you know she slid over to the kitchen and got [a] little blade--[small carving knife]." According to Smith, Bradford was stabbed in the stomach during the ensuing struggle and fell onto a chair. He removed the knife from her stomach, and she dragged or walked by herself to the bedroom. He recalled stabbing her in the neck in the bedroom after she called him a motherfucker, but he did not admit inflicting the other stab wounds. When she was lying on the bed, he took her clothes off and got back on top of her and had sex again. Police asked: "Q. * * * [A]fter you had sex with her the second time, after she was stabbed, then what'd you do? "A. I gathered up my things together and started taking her stuff downstairs. "Q. What'd you take out of there? "A. Her two TVs and her stereo."

Smith said he made four trips carrying her things down to his car and that he took her things in order to sell them. Although Smith initially claimed that he did not know whether Bradford had stopped breathing, he later admitted he decided to have sex with her again because "she was still breathing then." He said that he pulled his penis out as he started to climax and finished ejaculating on her stomach. He did this because he was thinking about getting out of the apartment. Smith claimed he threw the knife into the Ohio River and sold Bradford's stereo in Dayton. However, police recovered her stereo in Cincinnati. When police interviewed Smith, they also seized a pair of undershorts from him stained with blood of the same type as Bradford's.

Smith was indicted on two counts of felony-murder, count I alleging murder during rape, and count II alleging murder in the course of aggravated robbery. Each count contained two death penalty specifications, one alleging aggravated murder during rape and the other alleging murder during aggravated robbery. Count III alleged rape and count IV alleged aggravated robbery. Smith pled not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity, but he later withdrew the insanity plea. A panel of three judges convicted Smith as charged. After a hearing, the panel sentenced Smith to the death penalty on each murder count. The court of appeals affirmed the convictions and death penalties. The cause is now before this court upon an appeal as of right.

ALICE ROBIE RESNICK, Justice.
We have reviewed appellant's sixteen propositions of law, independently assessed the evidence relating to the death sentences, balanced the aggravating circumstances against the mitigating factors, and reviewed the proportionality of the sentences to those imposed in similar cases. As a result, we affirm the convictions and sentences of death.

* * * *

Smith v. Mitchell, 348 F.3d 177, (6th Cir. 2003). (Habeas)

Following murder conviction and imposition of death sentence, 574 N.E.2d 510, petition was filed for habeas corpus relief. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, S. Arthur Spiegel, Senior District Judge, 104 F.Supp.2d 773, entered order denying petition, and appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Suhrheinrich, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) attorney who represented capital murder defendant was not ineffective in allegedly failing to adequately investigate defendant's background and in allegedly presenting less than full and accurate mitigation evidence; (2) indigent capital murder defendant did not have right to any psychiatric assistance at sentencing, let alone to independent expert assistance, after he withdrew his insanity defense; (3) appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise certain alleged errors; (4) even assuming that it was error for state trial court to impose two death sentences for single homicide, error was not prejudicial; (5) defendant failed to show that ad hoc policies adopted by county prosecutor's office reflected any racial bias in charging and prosecuting capital offenses; (6) victim impact evidence did not so infect trial of capital murder case as to render it fundamentally unfair, or to warrant habeas relief; (7) defendant's waiver of right to jury trial was voluntary and knowing; (8) alleged unreliability of Ohio's capital sentencing procedures, in requiring defendant to prove the existence of mitigating circumstances by preponderance of evidence, did not rise to level of Constitutional violation; and (9) defendant was procedurally barred from claiming that African-Americans were underrepresented in county's grand jury pool. Affirmed. Cole, Circuit Judge, concurred in part and dissented in part and filed opinion.

SUHRHEINRICH, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which BATCHELDER, J., joined. COLE, J. (pp. 215-218), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge.
In April 1988, a unanimous three-judge panel of the Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County, sentenced William H. Smith ("Smith" or "Petitioner") to death for the aggravated murder of Mary Bradford. The Ohio state courts denied all of Smith's claims for relief, as did the federal district court on habeas. Smith now appeals from the judgment of the district court denying his application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging both his conviction and sentence. The principal issue on appeal is whether trial counsel were ineffective for failing to present mitigating evidence at sentencing. For the following reasons, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.

I. Background A. Facts

The following facts are taken from the Ohio Supreme Court's opinion on direct appeal.
On Saturday afternoon, September 26, 1987, Mary Virginia Bradford, age forty-seven, visited the Race Inn, a neighborhood bar in Cincinnati, Ohio. While at the Race Inn, she had several beers and met, talked, and danced with William H. Smith, appellant, a regular bar patron. She left the Race Inn around 11:45 p.m. Around 4:00 p.m., on September 27, Marvin Rhodes, Bradford's boyfriend, stopped by her apartment because he had not seen her since Friday, September 25. No one answered the doorbell, but Rhodes saw blood near the front door and found Bradford in the bedroom. Feeling her face, he found no life in her body and called the police.

Responding police officers found Bradford lying stabbed to death on her bed, nude from the waist down. On the floor, near her bed, police found a woman's pants and panties, bloodstained and turned inside out, and, on the bed, an oxygen machine used by asthmatics. Forensic examination disclosed a .13 blood-alcohol level and revealed sperm in her vagina and on her abdomen. Near the front door of the apartment, police found a chair, with a pool of blood on it, and, on the floor, blood smears including a bare bloody footprint leading to the bedroom. The apartment was otherwise exceptionally neat and clean, with no signs of disorder, disarray, or a struggle, and police found no murder weapon in the apartment. One color television, one black and white television, and a stack stereo with two speakers were missing from Bradford's apartment. Dr. Harry J. Bonnell, Chief Deputy Coroner, testified that Bradford died as a result of ten stab wounds to her upper body and consequent loss of blood. She was five feet, three inches tall, weighed one hundred sixteen pounds, and a portion of her lungs was missing, which explained her asthmatic condition. Bonnell numbered the wounds from one to ten for descriptive purposes (but not indicative of the order in which inflicted). The most lethal wounds, causing incapacitation within five minutes, were wound eight, a four-inch wound into Bradford's right lung and heart, and wound nine, a four-inch wound into the sternum and the heart's right ventricle. Wound seven, a five-inch puncture into the rib and liver, and wounds eight and nine all fractured bony structures. Wound two, four inches in depth, crossed her neck from left to right. Wound ten punctured the liver and was no more than four inches in depth. Two wounds, one and five, showed no signs of hemorrhage and thus were inflicted after death or when the heart was not pumping sufficient blood. Wounds one, three, four, and six were superficial. Bradford's body exhibited no other evidence of injury or trauma such as bruises or defense wounds that would indicate a violent struggle. All the wounds could have been inflicted by the same, single edged knife.

On September 28, 1987 homicide detectives went to where Smith lived, the home of Bertha Reid, Smith's mother, which was about four blocks from Bradford's house. When police arrived, Smith was not at home, and Reid let the officers in. While at Reid's home, police noticed a television set matching the description of one of the two sets missing from Bradford's home. Thereafter, police secured a warrant, found the missing two televisions in Reid's home, and seized them.

Reid testified that when her son came home around 2:00 a.m. on September 27, he did not act unusual, nor did he appear to be drunk, high, or upset. However, Smith did carry into Reid's home the two television sets in question along with a large stereo system and two speakers. Reid asked where he got the televisions and stereo, and Smith replied that his girlfriend Carolyn gave them to him. Reid did not accept her son's explanation, telling him he would "have to explain to me a little more about what's going on." Later that morning, Smith and his cousin, Greg took the stereo and two speakers away but left the televisions. Reid also showed police clothing that her son had worn and September 26 and 27, which police seized. Subsequent forensic analysis revealed that Smith's shirt and shoes bore traces of human blood.

On September 28, 1987, police apprehended and took Smith to police headquarters for questioning. After being advised of his rights, Smith agreed to talk to police. Smith initially asserted that he had driven Bradford home that night but had just dropped her off. He later admitted that he had been in her apartment but had left when her boyfriend arrived. Smith told police that he met Bradford at the Race Inn, later drove her and her girlfriend to another bar, and then drove Bradford home. While at her house, Smith claimed that someone he thought to be Bradford's boyfriend arrived, and Smith decided to leave quickly. After Smith left, he realized that he had left a packet of cocaine, worth $2,500, at Bradford's house. After he returned, Bradford's boyfriend and the cocaine were both gone. Smith then talked with Bradford.

" * * * [W]e talked about restitution, you know. She said she'd give me some of that body. I said okay, it's good enough for me, you know, but then after I got that [had sex with her] it wasn't good enough, you know, so I asked her like you got any money and stuff, you know. She said she ain't have no money. So we start arguing and next thing you know she slid over to the kitchen and got [a] little blade--[small carving knife]." According to Smith, Bradford was stabbed in the stomach during the ensuing struggle and fell onto a chair. He removed the knife from her stomach, and she dragged or walked by herself to the bedroom. He recalled stabbing her in the neck in the bedroom after she called him a motherfucker, but he did not admit inflicting the other stab wounds. When she was lying on the bed, he took her clothes off and got back on top of her and had sex again. Police asked: "Q. * * * [A]fter you had sex with her the second time, after she was stabbed, then what'd you do? "A. I gathered up my things together and started taking her stuff downstairs. "Q. What'd you take out of there? "A. Her two TVs and her stereo."

Smith said he made four trips carrying her things down to his car and that he took her things in order to sell them. Although Smith initially claimed that he did not know whether Bradford had stopped breathing, he later admitted he decided to have sex with her again because "she was still breathing then." He said that he pulled his penis out as he started to climax and finished ejaculating on her stomach. He did this because he was thinking about getting out of the apartment. Smith claimed he threw the knife into the Ohio River and sold Bradford's stereo in Dayton. However, police recovered her stereo in Cincinnati. When police interviewed Smith, they also seized a pair of undershorts from him stained with blood of the same type as Bradford's. State v. Smith, 61 Ohio St.3d 284, 574 N.E.2d 510, 512-14 (Ohio 1991).

B. Trial Proceedings

Smith was indicted on October 21, 1987, on two counts of aggravated murder, pursuant to Ohio Rev.Code § 2903.01(B) (Counts I & II), and one count of rape (Count III), and one count of aggravated robbery (Count IV). Counts I and II each contained two death penalty specifications, one alleging aggravated murder during rape and the other alleging murder during aggravated robbery. Smith initially entered a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity as to all charges. [FN1] As a result, the trial court ordered that Smith be evaluated with respect to his mental state at the time of the alleged offense. Smith was evaluated by three experts, Nancy Schmidtgoessling, Ph.D, a clinical psychologist of the Court Psychiatric Center, Roger H. Fisher, Ph.D, a clinical psychologist, and Glenn Weaver, M.D., a psychiatrist. Dr. Schmidtgoessling evaluated Smith on November 27, 1987, and on December 12, 1987. On December 14, 1987, Dr. Schmidtgoessling filed a report with the court, in which she concluded that Smith currently showed no sign of major psychological disorder and that he was sane at the time of the alleged offense.

* * *

IV. Conclusion Having completed our responsibility "to ensure that Petitioner's conviction and death sentence comport with the requirements of our Constitution," Byrd, 209 F.3d at 540, we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the district court denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus.