Opinion ID: 1353976
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Lack of preparation

Text: The trial court's order states that Mr. Haynes was ineffective on the basis that he did not prepare for trial. The order stated: Trial counsel Mr. Haynes admitted he filed no motions of any kind on defendant's behalf. Mr. Haynes filed no motion for discovery. Kenneth Haynes filed no evidentiary motions of any kind. However, the petitioner did not make a showing of both error and prejudice in accordance with Strickland, supra . Mr. Haynes obtained the complete files of the prosecutor and the sheriff, and though he did not file any discovery motions, it was not shown at the hearing that Mr. Haynes failed to obtain any crucial piece of evidence. The trial court's order goes on to state that Haynes admitted he did not go out and interview potential witnesses. This finding is clearly erroneous. Mr. Haynes stated at the post-trial hearing that he interviewed many witnesses, though he did not call them to testify. Mr. Haynes's statements cannot be interpreted as an admission that he did not interview potential witnesses.