ineffective assistance claim in Colorado

2025It is the defendant’s burden to establish both Strickland prongs, People v. Corson, 2016 CO 33, ¶ 34 , and failing to prove either of these two prongs defeats an ineffective assistance claim, People v. Thompson, 2020 COA 117, ¶ 50 . ¶ 27 To establish deficient performance, a defendant must prove that counsel’s representation “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 . “[J]udicial 10 scrutiny of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential, evaluate particular acts and omissions from counsel’s perspective at the time, and indulge a strong presumpti

2025See id. at 694 ; People v. Phipps, 2016 COA 190M , ¶ 39 (holding that, even if counsel “was deficient in failing to investigate,” the defendant’s ineffective assistance claim failed because he could not show prejudice). ¶ 36 We thus conclude that the postconviction court did not err by denying Howell’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim without a hearing. 15 D.

2025It is the defendant’s burden to establish both Strickland prongs, People v. Corson, 2016 CO 33, ¶ 34 , and failing to prove either of these two prongs defeats an ineffective assistance claim, People v. Thompson, 2020 COA 117, ¶ 50 . ¶ 27 To establish deficient performance, a defendant must prove that counsel’s representation “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 . “[J]udicial 10 scrutiny of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential, evaluate particular acts and omissions from counsel’s perspective at the time, and indulge a strong presumpti

2025Ardolino v. People, 69 P.3d 73, 77 (Colo. 2003). ¶ 16 The prejudice element of an ineffective assistance claim premised on counsel’s failure to file a disqualification motion cannot be satisfied unless the defendant alleges the judge was actually biased.

2026See People in Interest of C.H., 166 P.3d 288 , 291 (Colo. App. 2007).

2019And, importantly, mother does not describe on appeal how trial counsel’s performance was “outside of the wide range of professionally competent assistance” or how she was “prejudiced by counsel’s errors.” People in Interest of C.H., 166 P.3d 288 , 291 (Colo. App. 2007). ¶ 46 “If [a] parent’s allegations lack sufficient specificity, the ineffective assistance claim may be denied without further inquiry.” Id.; accord People in Interest of S.L., 2017 COA 160, ¶ 60 .

2026Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984); Dunlap v. People, 173 P.3d 1054, 1062-63 (Colo. 2007).

2016See id. at 1063 . ¶ 29 To succeed on an ineffective assistance claim, a defendant must show that counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient and that this deficient performance prejudiced the defense.

2026In the context of a guilty plea, the prejudice prong requires a defendant to “show that 9 there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” People v. Sifuentes, 2017 COA 48M , ¶ 20 (quoting Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985)). ¶ 20 A postconviction court may reject an ineffective assistance claim if the defendant fails to demonstrate either deficient performance or prejudice.

2026A defendant who pleaded guilty must show “a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985); see also People v. Sifuentes, 2017 COA 48M , ¶ 20. ¶ 13 An ineffective assistance claim may be denied without a hearing if the defendant’s allegations fail to satisfy either prong of the Strickland test.

2016See People v. Garcia, 815 P.2d 937, 941 (Colo.1991) ("In resolving an ineffective-assistance claim, a court is not required to first determine whether counsel's performance was constitutionally deficient, for if the defendant fails to make an affirmative demonstration of prejudice, then the court may resolve the claim on that basis alone." (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 )). 39 So, is there a reasonable probability that Corson would have gone to trial if the People had disclosed K.B.'s false-reporting adjudication?

2016See People v. Garcia, 815 P.2d 937, 941 (Colo. 1991) (“In resolving an ineffective-assistance claim, a court is not required to first determine whether counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient, for if the defendant fails to make an affirmative demonstration of prejudice, then the court may resolve the claim on that basis alone.” (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697)). ¶39 So, is there a reasonable probability that Corson would have gone to trial if the People had disclosed K.B.’s false-reporting adjudication?

2026See People v. Aguilar, 2012 COA 181, ¶ 9 .

2026See People v. Aguilar, 2012 COA 181, ¶ 9 .

2026See People v. Sparks, 914 P.2d 544, 548 (Colo. App. 1996) (concluding that advising the defendant not to testify did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel); People v. Osorio, 170 P.3d 796, 799 (Colo. App. 2007) (a postconviction court may reject an ineffective assistance claim if it is bare and conclusory in nature, or lacks supporting factual allegations). ¶ 35 While admitting this claim was “spar[s]e[,] consisting of only one paragraph and comprising only 59 words,” Church nonetheless 2 To the extent Church attempts to provide these explanations in his reply brief, we will not con

2025See People v. Osorio, 170 P.3d 796, 800 (Colo. App. 2007) (rejecting the defendant’s ineffective assistance claim because “[o]ther than a bare assertion of errors, no detail [wa]s provided to explain why [the challenged] actions were deficient or to place them in context”).

2024See People v. Villanueva, 2016 COA 70, ¶ 66 (“If a court determines that a defendant has failed to prove either prong of the Strickland analysis, it may deny an ineffective assistance claim without addressing the other prong.”). 6 ¶ 13 In determining whether counsel’s performance was deficient, we evaluate the representation from counsel’s perspective at the time of the representation, and we “indulge a strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Ardolino v. People, 69 P.3d 73, 76 (Colo. 2003). ¶ 14 To prove deficient performanc

2019See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 (“[A] court need not determine whether counsel’s performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by the defendant as a result of the alleged deficiencies.”); People v. Villanueva, 2016 COA 70, ¶ 66 (“If a court determines that a defendant has failed to prove either prong of the Strickland analysis, it may deny an ineffective assistance claim without addressing the other prong.”). ¶ 15 To show prejudice, defendant had to show a reasonable probability that the result of the trial would have been different had defense counsel investigated the hosp

2016People v. Vieyra, 169 P.3d 205, 209 (Colo. App. 2007). 110 The Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury guarantees a defendant the right to a jury selected from a representative cross-section of the community.

2016People v. Vieyra , 169 P.3d 205, 209 (Colo. App. 2007). ¶10 The Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury guarantees a defendant the right to a jury selected from a representative cross-section of the community.

2014Strickland, 466 U.S. at 693 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ("Conflict of interest claims aside, actual ineffectiveness claims alleging a deficiency in attorney performance are subject to a general requirement that the defendant affirmatively prove prejudice."); Silve v. People, 156 P.3d 1164, 1169 (Colo.2007) ("Strickland v. Washington created a two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel claims which places the burden on the defendant to show (1) 'that counsel's performance was deficient' and (2) 'that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.'") (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 , 104

2011See Silva v. People, 156 P.3d 1164, 1169 (Colo.2007) (because statutory right to postconviction counsel arises only when the Crim.

2025People v. Duran, 2015 COA 141, ¶ 9 , 382 P.3d 1237, 1239 . ¶ 12 To succeed on an ineffective assistance claim, a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, meaning that it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced the defendant, meaning there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different.

2025People v. Duran, 2015 COA 141, ¶ 9 , 382 P.3d 1237, 1239 . ¶ 12 To succeed on an ineffective assistance claim, a defendant must establish that (1) counsel’s performance was deficient, meaning that it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced the defendant, meaning there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different.

2026See People v. Washington, 2014 COA 41, ¶ 20 (“If a court determines that a defendant has failed to prove either prong of the Strickland analysis, it may deny an ineffective assistance claim without addressing the other prong.”). ¶ 23 As support for its conclusion, the court noted that Rabinkov’s postconviction counsel had in fact received copies of the discovery and had access to the court file.

2025See People v. Washington, 2014 COA 41, ¶ 20 (“If a court determines that a defendant has failed to prove either prong of the Strickland analysis, it may deny an ineffective assistance claim without addressing the other prong.”); see also People v. Dyer, 2019 COA 161, ¶ 39 (“[A]n appellate court may affirm a lower court’s decision on any ground supported by the record . . . .”).2 2 Given how innocuous Agent Green’s testimony was, we fail to see how the claim would have prevailed on appeal under any standard of reversal.

2026See People v. Owens, 2024 CO 10 , ¶ 90 (we do not address arguments made for the first time in a reply brief); see also People v. Huggins, 2019 COA 116, ¶ 17 (we will not consider allegations not raised in a postconviction motion and therefore not ruled on by the postconviction court). 17 contends on appeal that he should be afforded a hearing on this issue in the interest of judicial economy.

2025See People v. Cuevas, 2024 COA 84 , ¶ 33 (holding that, because of the need for a developed factual record, an ineffective assistance claim should ordinarily be raised in a postconviction motion, not on appeal); People v. Huggins, 2019 COA 116, ¶ 17 (“When a defendant does not raise an issue in a postconviction motion or during the hearing on that motion, and the postconviction court therefore does not have an opportunity to rule on the issue, as a general rule, the issue is not properly preserved for appeal and [an appellate court] will not consider it.”). ¶ 22 Despite that rule, Suarez effec

2025To meet this burden, the defendant must establish that rejection of the plea “would have been rational under the circumstances.” Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 372 (2010). 9 ¶ 20 An ineffective assistance claim may be denied without a hearing if the defendant’s allegations fail to satisfy either prong of the Strickland test.

2025See Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 372 (2010) (To obtain relief on an ineffective assistance claim premised on counsel’s advice before the defendant enters a plea, “a petitioner must convince the court that a decision to reject the plea bargain would have been rational under the circumstances.”); People v. Sifuentes, 2017 COA 48M , ¶ 21 (an analysis of whether a decision to reject a plea offer would have been rational should consider “the attractiveness of the plea deal and the risks of going to trial”). ¶ 35 Accordingly, we perceive no error in the district court’s finding that counsel’s

2025People v. Gandiaga, 70 P.3d 523, 526 (Colo. App. 2002). 1.

2009Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 ; People v. Gandiaga, 70 P.3d 523, 526 (Colo.App.2002).

2021“An ineffective assistance claim will not succeed if a defendant fails to prove eit her prong of the test.” People v. Villarreal , 231 P.3d 29, 33 (C olo.

2012The court of appeals followed People v. Villarreal , 231 P.3d 29, 34 ( Colo.App. 2009 ) , which determined that the prejudice component of a plain error analysis is essentially identical to the prejudice component of an ineffective assistance of counsel analysis under Strickland .

2025It is the defendant’s burden to establish both Strickland prongs, People v. Corson, 2016 CO 33, ¶ 34 , and failing to prove either of these two prongs defeats an ineffective assistance claim, People v. Thompson, 2020 COA 117, ¶ 50 . ¶ 27 To establish deficient performance, a defendant must prove that counsel’s representation “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 . “[J]udicial 10 scrutiny of counsel’s performance must be highly deferential, evaluate particular acts and omissions from counsel’s perspective at the time, and indulge a strong presumpti

2025As other divisions of this court have determined in the context of expert witness testimony, “‘[w]hen the evidence only provides speculative proof of prejudice,’ a defendant’s ineffective assistance claim fails.” People v. Thompson, 2020 COA 117, ¶ 55 (quoting People v. Finney, 2012 COA 38, ¶ 66 ). ¶ 17 Finch’s prejudice argument relies entirely on speculation and conclusory assumptions that cannot support his claim for relief.

2012While we have emphasized that it will often be necessary when considering an ineffective assistance claim to hold a hearing on whether an attorney's acts or omissions were reasonable “strategic choices,” People v. Gross , 2012 CO 60 , ¶ 11 , 287 P.3d 105 ( citing Ardolino , 69 P.3d at 77 ) , today's opinion implies that such hearings will be similarly necessary to determine prejudice, see Villarreal v. People , 2012 CO 64 , ¶¶ 6–7 ( decided today in conjunction with this case ) (affirming the court of appeals on the ground that the trial court “properly conducted a separate factual analysis un

2012While we have emphasized that it will often be necessary when considering an ineffective assistance claim to hold a hearing on whether an attorney's acts or omissions were reasonable "strategie choices," People v. Gross, 2012 CO 60 , T11, 287 P.3d 105 (citing Ardolino, 69 P.3d at 77 ), today's opinion implies that such hearings will be similarly necessary to determine prejudice, see Villarreal v. People, 2012 CO 64, 116-7 (decided today in conjunction with this case) (affirming the court of appeals on the ground that the trial court "properly conducted a separate factual analysis under the Str

2026See Sperry v. McKune, 445 F.3d 1268, 1275 (10th Cir. 2006) (explaining that counsel’s failure to raise a meritless issue is not ineffective assistance); see also Hagos v. People, 2012 CO 63 , ¶ 25 (Colo. App. 2009) (when an ineffective assistance claim was premised on counsel’s alleged failure to attack the search of the defendant’s apartment, and that search was found to be constitutionally permissible in a companion case, the claim failed because it could not meet the deficient performance prong of the Strickland test). ¶ 18 We are not persuaded by Ciarcia’s argument on appeal that his claim

2016Id. at ¶¶ 37 -42 ("[T]he specter of an ineffective assistance claim favors permitting flawed appeals to proceed in the interest of judicial economy."); see also Estep v. People , 753 P.2d 1241 , 1246 (Colo. 1988). ¶ 44 A closer look at defendant's vagueness challenge dispels this specter because we do not see how he could show that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to have raised vagueness.

2025Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984); People v. Duran, 2025 COA 34, ¶ 16 , 569 P.3d 899 , 904.

2025See People v. Duran, 2025 COA 34, ¶ 16 . ¶ 14 If a postconviction court denies a Rule 35(c) motion after an evidentiary hearing, we defer to the court’s credibility determinations and factual findings if they are supported by the record.

2025Davis, 849 P.2d at 861 ; People v. Apodaca, 998 P.2d 25, 29 (Colo. App. 1999). 1.

2006See People v. Thomas, 867 P.2d 880 (Colo.1994); People v. Apodaca, supra. Such procedure is particularly appropriate where, as here, more facts are needed to determine, for example, whether defense counsel did in fact hire an investigator; whether the acts and omissions of which defendant complains constituted deficient performance under the circumstances; whether such acts or omissions were based on trial strategy and thus are insufficient to support an ineffective assistance claim, see Ardolino v. People, 69 P.3d 73 (Colo.2003); and whether defendant was prejudiced by any of the acts or omis

2025See People v. Chalchi-Sevilla, 2019 COA 75, ¶ 6 (citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 ).

2024People v. Chalchi- Sevilla, 2019 COA 75, ¶ 7 . ¶8 To sufficiently allege a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), a defendant must (1) “identify the acts or omissions of counsel that are alleged not to have been the result of reasonable professional judgment” (the deficient performance prong), id. at 690 ; and (2) “assert facts that, if true, show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different” (the prejudice prong), People v. Timoshchuk, 2018 COA 153, ¶ 22 .

2025Baker, 104 P.3d at 897-98 ; Long, 126 P.3d at 286-87 . ¶ 19 We acknowledge that when an ineffective assistance claim is based on counsel’s failure to perfect a direct appeal, we do not analyze the merits of the proposed appellate claims because, in such cases, the prejudice is not in the outcome of the proceeding but in the forfeiture of it.

2013See, eg., People v. Baker, 104 P.3d 893, 898 (Colo.2005) (holding that the Court of Appeals abused its discretion by dismissing the defendant's appeal as untimely because, as relevant here, it would be in the interest of judicial economy to avoid a Crim.