Opinion ID: 2293362
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: On appeal, Rice contends that the hearing justice erred in denying his application for postconviction relief by deeming his trial counsel's testimony during the evidentiary hearing as credible and by characterizing counsel's actions as tactical decisions not unreasonable in light of the circumstances. Rice emphasizes that during trial, the victim had been thoroughly impeached, and in his view, the incremental benefit of establishing additional inconsistencies in the victim's testimony by way of examining the nurse practitioner and the DCYF worker thus was extravagantly outweighed by the prejudice caused by the prior consistent statements of the victim allowed into evidence as a result. Rice maintains that such deficiencies on the part of his trial counsel resulted in an unfair proceeding that led to a confidence-lacking verdict. While not comprehensively briefed on appeal, Rice does appear to cursorily challenge the hearing justice's findings as to trial counsel's efforts with respect to securing a potential medical expert. [10] On appeal, Rice does not raise the hearing justice's denial of his claim of newly discovered evidence.