In Phillips v. State, 608 So. 2d 778, 782 (Fla. 1992), the Court determined that Phillips demonstrated both Strickland deficiency and prejudice where trial counsel admitted to doing "virtually no preparation for the penalty phase." The only testimony presented as mitigation was Phillips' mother's testimony that Phillips was a good son. During postconviction proceedings, Phillips produced much mitigating evidence through testimony of relatives, friends, and experts. The experts opined that "Phillips was emotionally, intellectually, and socially deficient, that he had lifelong deficits in his adaptive functioning, that he was withdrawn and socially isolated, that he had a schizoid personality, and that he was passive-aggressive." Id. at 782-83. Both experts concluded that Phillips was within the statutory mitigating circumstances of extreme emotional disturbance and inability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. Id. at 783. Their opinions were that Phillips did not have the requisite intent for either the cold, calculated, and premeditated or heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstances, id., which the trial court had found, see Phillips v. State, 476 So. 2d 194, 196 (Fla. 1985).