Court Opinion

ID: 9628917
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 09:34:21.735057+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:25.569367
License: Public Domain

LUMPKIN, Judge,
concur in results:
¶ 1 I concur, based on stare decisis, in the discussion dealing with ineffective assistance of counsel. See Walker v. State, 933 P.2d 327, 341-44 (OM.Cr.1997) (LumpMn, J.: Concur in Results).
¶2 I have reviewed Petitioner’s application, together with the argument and authority provided. In accordance with the criteria set out in Braun v. State, 937 P.2d 505, 511-14 (OM.Cr.1997), I concur with the Court’s decision that counsel’s performance was not deficient and the underlying substantive claims sought to be raised by petitioner are proeedurally barred.
¶3 In addition, it should be noted the criteria set out in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), for evaluating effectiveness of counsel has been further explained in Lockhart v. Fretwell, 506 U.S. 364, 113 S.Ct. 838, 122 L.Ed.2d 180 (1993). Applying the Lockhart standard, the record is void of any evidence the trial was rendered unfair and the verdict rendered suspect or unreliable.