Court Opinion

ID: 9493236
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:01:46.252512+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:55:43.457538
License: Public Domain

ANDERSON, Chief Judge,
dissenting:
I agree with Judge Barkett that Chandler has satisfied the prejudice prong of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). I agree with Judge Tjoflat that the performance prong should be remanded to the district court. Because the district court found that the prejudice prong was not satisfied, it did not address the performance prong. As Judge Tjoflat correctly explains, the district judge who heard the evidence should make the fact findings and resolve the material facts which are in dispute. I agree with Judge Tjoflat that, in this case, an appropriate resolution of the performance prong cannot be made without such fact findings by the district court. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.