Opinion ID: 160570
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Well, I don't agree with you.

Text: 114 Q. Okay. Explain to me why that might be. 115 A. Well, I mean, you're talking about when he says family and stuff? 116 Q. Uh-huh. 117 A. Well, what you've gone back over, alcoholism and all these other things that you've named off, social problems and all this, that would cover it under family and stuff. But it was my understanding they [Battenfield and Shook] had discussed it, talked about it, and that was - but he did not want to put on any evidence. 118 Q. Judge, do you recall - well, if I were to tell you that Mr. Shook had spent, according to evidence that we have in the record, had spent virtually no time discussing the concept of mitigation with Mr. Battenfield or with his parents, would you have any reason to believe that Mr. Shook could have given adequate advice to Mr. Battenfield about what that evidence might have been? 119 A. Sir, I don't really understand your question. 120