Opinion ID: 1439724
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Selection of experts

Text: Moreover, the selection of expert witnesses, at trial, is not a matter Goodwin can successfully challenge in a 29.15 proceeding. Generally, the selection of witnesses and the introduction of evidence are questions of trial strategy and virtually unchallengeable. State v. Kenley, 952 S.W.2d 250, 266 (Mo. banc 1997). Defense counsel is not obligated to shop for an expert witness who might provide more favorable testimony. Id. at 268 (citing [ State v. ] Taylor, 929 S.W.2d [209] at 225 [(Mo. banc 1996)]; State v. Mease, 842 S.W.2d 98, 114 (Mo. banc 1992)). Taylor v. State, 126 S.W.3d 755, 762 (Mo. banc 2004). Three experts testified that Goodwin was severely depressed, suffered from personality disorders, was of borderline intelligence, but was not mentally retarded. Counsel was not required to find another expert. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to shop around for someone to testify that Goodwin was retarded. The motion court did not clearly err in dismissing this claim. Goodwin did not present credible evidence at the motion hearing to support his claims of mental retardation and ineffective assistance of counsel for not presenting those claims.