Opinion ID: 2317416
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: The merits of DeRosa's claim

Text: As a threshold matter, it is well established that insufficient preparation of the mitigation case can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Wilson v. Sirmons, 536 F.3d 1064, 1142 (10th Cir. 2008) (citing Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 395, 120 S.Ct. 1495, 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000)). But this is so only if the investigation fails to ... uncover significant mitigating evidence. Id. at 1143. And, even if counsel's performance is determined to have been deficient, DeRosa must further establish that the deficient performance prejudiced his defense. Strickland, 466 U.S. at 691, 104 S.Ct. 2052 (An error by counsel, even if professionally unreasonable, does not warrant setting aside the judgment of a criminal proceeding if the error had no effect on the judgment.). In order to assess both prongs of the Strickland test, we shall begin by reviewing the mitigating evidence that was actually presented by DeRosa's trial counsel. We will then review the additional mitigating evidence that DeRosa now contends should have been presented.