Opinion ID: 732905
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Counsel's Performance on Appeal

Text: 22 Donovan argues first, with regard to counsel's performance on appeal, that the issues raised on direct appeal had little chance of success, that counsel should have recognized as much, and that the issues he raised in his petition were fundamental defects resulting in a complete miscarriage of justice. We have repeatedly emphasized, however, that appellate counsel need not advance every conceivable argument on appeal. Appellate counsel is constitutionally ineffective only if counsel fails to raise issues that are (1) obvious, and (2) clearly stronger than the ones raised. Kelly v. United States, 29 F.3d 1107, 1112 (7th Cir.1994). The issues Donovan cites here are neither obvious nor clearly stronger than those presented and decided on direct appeal. Donovan, 24 F.3d 908 (7th Cir.1994). 2 The district court concluded, and we agree, that counsel could reasonably have concluded that there was insufficient merit to pursue these issues, or that raising these issues would have detracted from the arguments made on appeal. See Velarde v. United States, 972 F.2d 826, 829 (7th Cir.1992).