Guerry Wayne Hertz v. Walter A. McNeil

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
OCTOBER 22, 2010
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-15613
D. C. Docket No. 06-00507-CV-RS
GUERRY WAYNE HERTZ,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
WALTER A. MCNEIL,
CHARLES J. CRIST, JR.,
Respondents-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
(October 22, 2010)
Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

-- 1 of 2 --

The sole issue on which a certificate of appealability was granted in this
capital case is whether the Florida Supreme Court’s decision that Hertz was not
denied effective assistance of counsel in regard to the presentation of mental
health mitigating circumstances evidence at the penalty state, Hertz v. State, 941
So. 2d 1031, 1037-45 (Fla.2006), was contrary to or an unreasonable application
of clearly established federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the
United States, 28 U.S.C. ¶ 2254(d)(1).
In denying Hertz’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the district court set
out all of the facts relating to this issue, all of Hertz’s arguments about it, and all
of the reasons those arguments lack merit. See Hertz v. McNeil, No. 4:06cv507-
RS, 2009 WL 3161813, at *15-31 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 25, 2009). Having read the
briefs and the relevant parts of the record, and having listened to oral argument,
we fully agree with the district court that the Florida Supreme Court’s decision
that Hertz’s trial counsel provided reasonable professional assistance during the
penalty stage of his capital trial is not contrary to or an unreasonable application of
clearly established federal law.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --