Opinion ID: 6498634
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Investigator O’Brien’s Opinion Testimony

Text: The defendant next contends that the trial court erred by failing to find that his counsel was ineffective because he elicited O’Brien’s opinion of the defendant’s truthfulness during an investigatory interview. The trial court found that even if counsel’s conduct was constitutionally deficient, the defendant was not prejudiced. We agree with the trial court. Upon review of the record, we conclude that the defendant has failed to demonstrate he was prejudiced by the challenged testimony. Although counsel elicited testimony from O’Brien on cross-examination that he “saw several signs of deception” when interviewing the defendant, the State introduced “a wealth of other evidence that cast doubt upon” the defendant’s credibility. Accordingly, the defendant has not persuaded us that there is a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different if trial counsel had not elicited the challenged testimony. See Cable, 168 N.H. at 681.