Skip to content
KENNETH J. MCKENNA
Nev. Sup. Ct. \u00b7 1985 · Capital

McKenna v. State

705 P.2d 614 (Nev. 1985)

A capital appeal before the Nevada Supreme Court. The appellate team carried the full Eighth Amendment constitutional framework. The defendant was Mr. McKenna’s brother.

The Matter

The Matter

Patrick Charles McKenna was convicted of first-degree murder in the 1979 strangulation death of his cellmate, Jack Nobles, at the Clark County Jail. The original conviction had been reversed by the Nevada Supreme Court in McKenna v. State, 98 Nev. 38, 639 P.2d 557 (1982). Following retrial, the conviction and death sentence were affirmed in McKenna v. State, 705 P.2d 614 (Nev. 1985).

Kenneth J. McKenna joined the appellate team for the second conviction alongside Morgan Harris (Public Defender), Robert D. Larsen, Margaret Lafko, and Rick Ahlswede. The appeal engaged the full range of capital constitutional issues: death-qualified jury selection under Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968), and Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985); admissibility of mitigating evidence at capital penalty hearings; executive clemency instructions to capital juries; and proportionality review under NRS 177.055(2)(d).

The defendant was Kenneth J. McKenna’s brother. The record is noted precisely: Mr. McKenna stepped into a multi-decade capital matter, representing his own brother against virtually the entire prosecutorial apparatus of the State of Nevada. The related habeas proceeding McKenna v. McDaniel, 65 F.3d 1483 (9th Cir. 1995), describes that during the capital retrial Mr. McKenna was left for three days as the sole attorney for the defense after co-counsel withdrew.

Legal Significance

Legal Significance

The 1985 opinion is among Nevada’s capital precedents addressing the Eighth Amendment framework governing capital proceedings. The appeal documents substantive engagement with the interconnected doctrines of death qualification of jurors, mitigating-evidence admissibility, capital clemency instructions, and proportionality review.

Mr. McKenna\u2019s Role

Mr. McKenna’s Role

Counsel on the appellate team for the second conviction, engaged with the full constitutional framework of capital proceedings. In the related federal habeas proceeding McKenna v. McDaniel, 65 F.3d 1483 (9th Cir. 1995), the Ninth Circuit opinion describes trial-level work during the capital retrial in which Mr. McKenna served as the sole counsel for the defense for three days.

The Record

Citations & Related Authority

Nev. Sup. Ct. (second appeal)

Nev. Sup. Ct. (first appeal, reversed)

McKenna v. State, 98 Nev. 38, 639 P.2d 557 (1982)

9th Circuit (related habeas)

McKenna v. McDaniel, 65 F.3d 1483 (9th Cir. 1995)
Related Practice
Inquire

Begin a Conversation

Mr. McKenna reviews inquiries personally and responds within three business days to matters that meet the criteria of his practice.