Opinion ID: 2634905
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: [¶ 2] We will re-state and re-order the issues as follows: 1. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to move to dismiss the immodest, immoral, or indecent liberties with a minor charges on the ground that the statute had been repealed? 2. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to move to dismiss the immodest, immoral, or indecent liberties with a minor charges on the ground that the statute was unconstitutional? 3. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to raise a hearsay objection to certain testimony by the victims' mother? 4. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to move for a mistrial based upon certain testimony by the victims' mother? 5. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to move for a judgment of acquittal? 6. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to object to the district court's rejection of a proposed instruction defining the word knowingly as an element of the crime of taking immodest, immoral, or indecent liberties with a minor? 7. Did trial counsel provide ineffective assistance by failing to object to portions of law enforcement officers' testimony on the ground that such was expert testimony that was inadmissible under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993)? 8. Do the foregoing alleged deficiencies constitute cumulative error?