Opinion ID: 734877
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: failure to call palmer's wife as an alibi witness

Text: 12 Palmer testified that at the time of the Circle K robbery he was home with his pregnant wife. Palmer's counsel subpoenaed Palmer's wife but ultimately did not call her as a witness. Palmer argues that counsel's decision not to call Mrs. Palmer was unreasonable. 13 Counsel's tactical decision not to call a particular witness does not form the basis for an ineffective assistance claim. See Morris v. California, 966 F.2d 448, 456 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 831 (1992). In her declaration in support of Palmer's state habeas petition, Mrs. Palmer stated she would have testified that: 14 My husband was with me at 5:00 a.m. on October 5, 1991, at the time of the Circle K robbery. He had to have been with me at 5:00 in the morning on October 5th because I was approximately nine months pregnant. Although my husband sometimes went out at night with his friends, he usually would come home no later than 2:00 a.m. He never stayed out all night because I was about to have my baby. 15 Particularly because Palmer was arrested while driving a stolen vehicle at approximately 3:00 a.m. on October 6, 1991, the prosecutor easily could have impeached Mrs. Palmer's proposed testimony. Counsel's decision not to call Mrs. Palmer and to rely on Palmer's and his sister-in-law's testimony that he was home at the time of the robbery clearly fell within the range of reasonable professional representation. See Denham v. Deeds, 954 F.2d 1501, 1505 (9th Cir.1992) (glaring inconsistencies in alibi witness's proposed testimony justified counsel's decision not to call witness). 16