Opinion ID: 886072
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Failure to Interview and Present Impeaching Testimony of a Critical Prosecution Witness

Text: ¶ 30 Hagen asserts that his trial counsel failed to interview Reece Cobeen, a critical prosecution witness. In addition, Hagen contends that his trial counsel failed to bring to the jury's attention a pretrial statement that would have contradicted Cobeen's testimony, or offer any other evidence to impeach him. The State, on the other hand, contends that this issue was previously decided in Hagen II. ¶ 31 The issue presented to this Court in Hagen II was whether Hagen's trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate or present testimony to impeach both Cobeen and Enger. With regard to Cobeen, we stated: We agree with the State that Bruce's ineffective assistance of counsel claim with regard to counsel's failure to investigate or present testimony impeaching Reece was raised and resolved during Bruce's direct appeal. Hagen II, ¶ 32 ( citing Hagen I, 273 Mont. at 444, 903 P.2d at 1388). Therefore, we conclude that this claim is barred by principles of res judicata.