the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals concluded that Dunaway’s trial counsel had, in fact, presented ‘some evidence that created doubt about his mental state at the time of the murders’, but thqt: “ ‘Based on the conflicting expert testimony concerning [Dunaway’s] sanity, testimony of lay witnesses .that [Dunaway] appeared.to be. sane, and [Dunaway’s] testimony and demeanor at trial, the .jury could have reasonably concluded that [Dunaway] was sane at the time of the murders.’ “Dunaway v. State, 746 So.2d [1021] at 1034 [ (1998) ]. “Based on evidence presented by Dunaway’s trial counsel and the holding of the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, the Court finds that this allegation of ineffective assistance is without merit. Gibby v. State, 753 So.2d 1206, 1207-1208 (Ala.Crim.App.1999) (<HOLDING>). In the alternative, the Court finds that
holding that where the coercion alleged to enter a plea is legally insufficient or conclusively refuted by the record there is no need to hold an evidentiary hearing or appoint conflictfree counsel holding that postconviction proceeding is a civil suit holding that a postconviction claim that is refuted by the record is without merit holding that misadvice of counsel as to the length of a sentence is a basis for postconviction relief if not refuted by the record holding that second state petition for postconviction relief that was dismissed as frivolous and patently without merit was properly filed