Opinion ID: 1180863
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Stipulation to identity of two victims

Text: (55) Defendant asserts trial counsel should not have stipulated to the identity of Slavik and Moore because the stipulation deprived [him] of showing reasonable doubt that the two decomposed bodies were the alleged victims. The evidence shows that both victims were positively identified by their dental records; requiring the prosecutor to produce an expert to testify to this effect would have served no useful purpose. Defendant had confessed to murdering the women whose bodies he found at the Igo dump, and the defense theory was that defendant killed these women but that he was insane. We fail to see how he was prejudiced by the stipulation. (56) Defendant similarly contends counsel were ineffective because they stipulated to the bite marks on Selix's body. If counsel did not stipulate to the bite marks, the prosecutor could have placed two experts on the stand, who, the record shows, would have positively identified the bite marks as those of defendant. We have never held counsel ineffective for stipulating to facts that may be readily proved. By doing so counsel avoided presentation of unnecessary gory details. This is a matter of trial tactics.