Opinion ID: 1944516
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 17

Heading: missing interrogations and promises of leniency

Text: Similar to his allegations regarding the 911 tape, Poindexter alleged the State failed to disclose certain interrogations of Peak and an arrangement that had been made in exchange for Peak's testimony. Alternatively, Poindexter alleged that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to adequately investigate these matters. The district court found that Poindexter failed to prove that any undisclosed interrogations actually took place or that any undisclosed deal was struck. We agree with the district court's conclusions. Poindexter's evidence on this subject consists almost entirely of inferences he makes upon the trial record. Poindexter infers that undisclosed interrogations must have taken place, because Peak changed his story between his August 28 and 31, 1970, interrogations. He also claims that Peak made reference during the preliminary hearing to his being interrogated at times not reflected by the police reports turned over to the defense, although Poindexter admits that Peak's testimony was somewhat confusing. [25] Poindexter infers that a plea bargain agreement was entered into before trial, because Peak received special treatment while in custody and ultimately ended up serving a lenient sentence as a juvenile. Poindexter also infers such an agreement from Peak's behavior at the preliminary hearing. With regard to the preliminary hearing, Peak admitted that he had a conversation with his attorney that indicated that he didn't have a chance. But he specifically denied having a conversation with the prosecution. When asked to explain what he was afraid of, Peak stated that twice during his original interrogations with police officers, they had mentioned the electric chair. Specifically, the officers had told him he was sitting in the electric chair so [he] had better tell the truth. Any new evidence presented at the postconviction evidentiary hearing on whether a deal was struck or coerced was unfavorable to Poindexter's claim. Knowles, O'Leary, and Cooper all testified that there were no promises of leniency in exchange for Peak's testimony and that there was no agreement whatsoever. As for threats, O'Leary specifically denied ever threatening anyone with the electric chair. Because Poindexter failed to prove the alleged agreement took place, the postconviction court properly concluded that no prosecutorial misconduct or ineffective assistance of counsel claims arose from the failure to disclose or to investigate it.