# Robert Dale Conklin v. Derrick Schofield

> Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · April 21, 2004 · 366 F.3d 1191

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415850

## Case

- **Full name:** Robert Dale CONKLIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Derrick SCHOFIELD, Respondent-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- **Decided:** April 21, 2004
- **Citations:** 366 F.3d 1191; 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 7659; 2004 WL 840614
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Edmondson
- **Judges:** Edmondson, Barkett, Wilson
- **Cited by:** 101 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415850

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that “the Supreme Court has ruled that an attorney’s failure to combat the prosecution must be ‘complete’ in order to avoid the prejudice requirement” and that in capital sentencing context, “if the attorney presents any mitigating evidence, then actual prejudice mu…
- explaining that in making a determination if the lack of funds rendered a petitioner’s trial fundamentally unfair, the court reviews “example[s] of evidence [the Petitioner] could have presented had the trial court granted his requests for assistance”
- explaining that the additional requirements in Moore and Stephens should not be considered in determining a trial court's reasonableness in denying funds if the trial occurred before those cases were decided
- holding that Ake is violated only when a court denies a timely request for an expert, denial of the request is unreasonable, and the denial renders the trial “fundamentally unfair”
- applying pre-AEDPA standard of review and denying claim that trial court errors and conduct of trial counsel combined to rob petitioner of fair trial and sentencing, but not relying upon Supreme Court precedent for its decision

## Opinion text

*1211 EDMONDSON, Chief Judge,
concurring in the result.
I also would affirm the district court’s judgment. I believe the A/ce-based claim has weaknesses beyond the one pointed to by Judge Wilson.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9415850. Public record. Not legal advice.