Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 177.0

16 

WONG  v.  BELMONTES 

Per Curiam 

(1988).  After  the  murder,  Belmontes  and  his  accomplices 
stole McConnell’s stereo, sold it for $100, and used the money 
to  buy  beer  and  drugs  for  the  night.  Id.,  at  764–765,  755 
P. 2d, at 318–319. 

Belmontes  was  convicted  of  murder  and  sentenced  to 
death  in  state  court.  Unsuccessful  on  direct  appeal  and 
state  collateral review,  Belmontes  sought federal  habeas  re­
lief, which the District Court denied.  The Court of Appeals 
reversed, ﬁnding instructional error, but we overturned that 
decision.  Ayers  v.  Belmontes,  549  U. S.  7  (2006);  see  also 
Brown v.  Belmontes, 544 U. S. 945 (2005). 

On  remand,  the  Court  of  Appeals  again  ruled  for  Bel­
montes, this time ﬁnding that Belmontes suffered ineffective 
assistance of counsel during the sentencing phase of his trial. 
The  District  Court  had  previously  denied  relief  on  that 
ground,  ﬁnding  that  counsel  for  Belmontes  had  performed 
deﬁciently  under  Ninth  Circuit  precedent,  but  that  Bel­
montes  could  not  establish  prejudice  under  Strickland  v. 
Washington,  466  U. S.  668  (1984).  Belmontes  v.  Calderon, 
Civ.  S–89–0736  DFL  JFM  (ED  Cal.,  Aug.  15,  2000),  App.  to 
Pet.  for  Cert.  140a,  179a,  183a.  The  Court  of  Appeals 
agreed  that  counsel’s  performance  was  deﬁcient,  but  dis­
agreed  with  the  District  Court  with  respect  to  prejudice, 
determining  that  counsel’s  errors  undermined  conﬁdence  in 
the  penalty  phase  verdict.  Belmontes  v.  Ayers,  529  F.  3d 
834,  859–863,  874  (CA9  2008).  We  disagree  with  the  Court 
of Appeals as to prejudice, grant the State’s petition for cer­
tiorari, and reverse. 

I 

Belmontes argues that his counsel was constitutionally in­
effective for failing to investigate and present sufﬁcient miti­
gating  evidence  during  the  penalty  phase  of  his  trial.  To 
prevail on this claim, Belmontes must meet both the deﬁcient 
performance  and  prejudice  prongs  of  Strickland,  466  U. S., 
at 687.  To show deﬁcient performance, Belmontes must es­
tablish that “counsel’s representation fell below an objective