Biblical Quote In Courtroom Not Grounds For Reversing Death Sentence

In Malicoat v. Mullin (US Ct. App., 10th Cir., October 11, 2005), the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel raised by a habeas petitioner who had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death. One of petitioner's claims was that his counsel on direct appeal had been ineffective for failing to argue that a carving in the courtroom bearing the Biblical quotation "An Eye For An Eye And A Tooth For A Tooth" deprived him of a fair trial. Petitioner argued that display of the maxim throughout the trial amounted to an Establishment Clause violation. The Court of Appeals held that trial judge's refusal to cover the inscription was not a structural error, and that, as a result, counsel's failure to advance a structural error argument on direct appeal did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel to petitioner.