Opinion ID: 1745774
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 16

Heading: Cabello was denied the effective assistance of counsel at the penalty phase of his trial in violation of the Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Text: Next, Cabello argues that his case suffered due to the ineffective assistance of counsel during the sentencing phase of his trial. Still within the framework of Strickland, Cabello cites several errors.
Cabello claims that his counsel was ineffective, when it failed to secure the testimony of family and friends as well as a psychologist, who could testify to Cabello's emotional and physical traumas, for introduction as mitigating evidence. Instead, counsel relied upon Cabello's age and poor health. Just as courts presume that counsel's decisions are strategic, so courts are reluctant to infer from silence a lack of strategy. Leatherwood, 473 So.2d at 969. Moreover, there is no absolute duty to present mitigating evidence. Wiley, 517 So.2d at 1379. See also, Strickland, 466 U.S. at 699, 104 S.Ct. at 2070, 80 L.Ed.2d at 701 (decision not to seek more character and psychological evidence was reasonable), King v. State, 503 So.2d 271, 274 (Miss. 1987) (strategic decision not to call character witnesses). In Wilcher v. State, 479 So.2d 710, 713 (Miss. 1985), this Court rejected post-conviction relief, where the movant failed to show prejudice, resulting from an inadequate investigation and presentation of mitigating evidence. Likewise, there is no prejudice shown in this case. Error is denied.
The Court fully addresses this allegation in Sections I.(L), III and IX. Error is denied.
Cabello contends that counsel was ineffective, when it failed to object to Dr. McLees' testimony and the prosecution's closing arguments during the sentencing phase of the trial. See, Section XV. Yet, on direct appeal, the Court found that Dr. McLees testified only as to medical facts, and that during closing arguments the prosecution took great liberty but did not exceed its limits. Cabello, 471 So.2d at 346, 349. Error is denied.
Cabello made this argument on direct appeal, which the Court found without merit. Cabello, 471 So.2d 345-6, 350. See, Section XXIII. Error is denied.
Cabello claims that his counsel was ineffective, when it failed to request certain jury instructions. In fact, the Court addressed the life option instruction in Cabello, 471 So.2d at 348, finding no error. Also, Instruction S-1, relating to aggravating and mitigating circumstances, conforms to Miss. Code Ann. §§ 99-19-101, -103 (Supp. 1987), and allows the jury to consider any other matter in mitigation. Error is denied.
When the prosecution introduced proof of the 1955 conviction for armed robbery, the document stated that the sentence of nine years was subject to such a commutation as is allowed by law. Cabello maintains that counsel was ineffective for its failure to object to this oblique reference to parole. The Court is unable to find either deficient performance or prejudice in this instance. Error is denied.