Opinion ID: 1745774
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Trial counsel failed to investigate mitigating evidence.

Text: 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.