Opinion ID: 778749
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Right To Testify

Text: 66 Campbell also contends that the district court erred in failing to find that his trial counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance by not advising him that he had a right to testify even if counsel recommended against it. It is established that counsel must inform the defendant that the ultimate decision whether to take the stand belongs to the defendant, and counsel must abide by the defendant's decision on this matter. Brown v. Artuz, 124 F.3d 73, 79 (2d Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1128, 118 S.Ct. 1077, 140 L.Ed.2d 135 (1998). 67 Here, the district court conducted a hearing at which Campbell's trial attorney testified that he had told Campbell that Campbell could testify at trial if he wished and that Campbell was fully aware of that right. The district court credited the attorney's testimony and discredited that of Campbell, noting that Campbell had been aggressively involved in every aspect of his case and that it would be unreasonable to conclude that he was uninformed or had suddenly become docile regarding his right to testify. Giving due deference to the court's assessments of credibility, we see no error in its conclusion that counsel did not fail to render correct advice. 68