Opinion ID: 890092
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failing to give an opening statement

Text: ¶19 Sartain argues that his trial counsel’s failure to give an opening statement prejudiced him, and counsel should have at least informed the jury about the presumption of innocence and the State’s burden of proof. We have held that trial counsel’s decision about whether to give an opening statement is “ordinarily a matter of trial tactics and strategy which will not form the basis for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.” Dawson v. State, 2000 MT 219, ¶ 99, 301 Mont. 135, 10 P.3d 49 (citation omitted). Moore stated in his affidavit that his trial strategy was based on cross-examination of the 3 The record copy of Sartain’s self-prepared motion bears an electronic facsimile stamp date of January 7, 2009, the day before Moore filed his motion to dismiss, and an attached note from Sartain is dated January 5, 2009. There is no further evidence regarding the time of its preparation or its delivery to Moore. 10 State’s witnesses and that he specifically chose not to give an opening statement because he did not want to “tip off” the State about his defense strategy or give the State any assistance in preparing witnesses for his cross-examination. Sartain has not demonstrated that Moore’s strategy was unreasonable under the circumstances, and thus the claim fails to satisfy the first prong of Strickland. Whitlow, ¶ 15; Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689, 104 S. Ct. at 2065.