ineffective assistance of counsel claim in North Dakota

2010In Heckelsmiller v. State, 2004 ND 191, ¶¶ 3-4 , 687 N.W.2d 454 , this Court succinctly described the nature of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim: The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article I, § 12 of the North Dakota Constitution guarantee a criminal defendant effective assistance of counsel.

2010In Heckelsmiller v. State, 2004 ND 191, ¶¶ 3-4 , 687 N.W.2d 454 , this Court succinctly described the nature of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim: The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article I, § 12 of the North Dakota Constitution guarantee a criminal defendant effective assistance of counsel.

2019"If it is easier to dispose of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, that course should be followed." Roth v. State , 2007 ND 112 , ¶ 9, 735 N.W.2d 882 .

2019"If it is easier to dispose of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, that course should be followed." Roth v. State , 2007 ND 112 , ¶ 9, 735 N.W.2d 882 .

2026Truelove v. State, 2020 ND 142, ¶ 11 , 945 N.W.2d 272 (“Trial strategy is the attorney’s province and on appeal, we do not second guess matters of trial tactics, such as the decision to call certain witnesses, hire private investigators, or how to question certain witnesses.” (cleaned up)); Broadwell v. State, 2014 ND 6, ¶ 7 , 841 N.W.2d 750 (“Courts need not address both elements of the ineffective assistance of counsel test, and if a court can dispose of the case by addressing only one element, it is encouraged to do so.”). [¶3] To the extent Davis attempted to raise other issues, those issu

2026Truelove v. State, 2020 ND 142, ¶ 11 , 945 N.W.2d 272 (“Trial strategy is the attorney’s province and on appeal, we do not second guess matters of trial tactics, such as the decision to call certain witnesses, hire private investigators, or how to question certain witnesses.” (cleaned up)); Broadwell v. State, 2014 ND 6, ¶ 7 , 841 N.W.2d 750 (“Courts need not address both elements of the ineffective assistance of counsel test, and if a court can dispose of the case by addressing only one element, it is encouraged to do so.”). [¶3] To the extent Davis attempted to raise other issues, those issu

2014In reviewing a trial counsel’s conduct in an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, we are cognizant of limiting the “distorting effect of hindsight.” Garcia v. State, 2004 ND 81, ¶ 5 , 678 N.W.2d 568 .

2014In reviewing a trial counsel’s conduct in an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, we are cognizant of limiting the “distorting effect of hindsight.” Garcia v. State, 2004 ND 81, ¶ 5 , 678 N.W.2d 568 .

2013Id. [¶8] In Kruckenberg , this Court explained the requirements a post-conviction applicant must meet to succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim: [A] defendant has a heavy burden of proving (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance.

2013Id. [¶ 8] In Kmclcenberg, this Court explained the requirements a post-conviction applicant must meet to succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim: [A] defendant has a heavy burden of proving (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance.

2008Burlington Northern and Sante Fe Railway Co. v. Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co., 1999 ND 39, ¶ 10 , 590 N.W.2d 433 .” [¶ 9] The “heavy burden” required for a post-conviction relief applicant to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim was also described in Heckelsmiller, 2004 ND 191, ¶ 3 , 687 N.W.2d 454 : “[A] defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel has a heavy burden of proving (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance.” DeCoteau [v. State], 1998 ND 199,

2008Burlington Northern and Sante Fe Railway Co. v. Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co., 1999 ND 39, ¶ 10 , 590 N.W.2d 433 .” [¶ 9] The “heavy burden” required for a post-conviction relief applicant to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim was also described in Heckelsmiller, 2004 ND 191, ¶ 3 , 687 N.W.2d 454 : “[A] defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel has a heavy burden of proving (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance.” DeCoteau [v. State], 1998 ND 199,

2021Flanagan [v. State], 2006 ND 76, ¶ 9 , 712 N.W.2d 602 .

2021Flanagan [v. State], 2006 ND 76, ¶ 9 , 712 N.W.2d 602 .

2017“To avoid summary dismissal of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the post-conviction applicant must present some evidence that his counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and he must overcome the presumption that his counsel’s performance was within the broad range of reasonableness.” Id. (quoting Klose v. State, 2008 ND 143, ¶ 13 , 752 N.W.2d 192 ). [¶ 8] An applicant claiming, ineffective assistance of counsel has the ultimate burden of proving the two-prong test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.

2017“To avoid summary dismissal of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the post-conviction applicant must present some evidence that his counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and he must overcome the presumption that his counsel’s performance was within the broad range of reasonableness.” Id. (quoting Klose v. State, 2008 ND 143, ¶ 13 , 752 N.W.2d 192 ). [¶ 8] An applicant claiming, ineffective assistance of counsel has the ultimate burden of proving the two-prong test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.

2017A petitioner must establish both in order to prevail. [¶ 7] “Effectiveness of counsel is measured by an ‘objective standard of reasonableness’ considering ‘prevailing professional norms.’ ” State v. Myers, 2009 ND 141, ¶ 14 , 770 N.W.2d 713 (quoting Clark v. State, 2008 ND 234, ¶ 12 , 758 N.W.2d 900 ). *478 To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, an applicant must “first overcome the strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Myers, at ¶ 14 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

2017A petitioner must establish both in order to prevail. [¶ 7] “Effectiveness of counsel is measured by an ‘objective standard of reasonableness’ considering ‘prevailing professional norms.’ ” State v. Myers, 2009 ND 141, ¶ 14 , 770 N.W.2d 713 (quoting Clark v. State, 2008 ND 234, ¶ 12 , 758 N.W.2d 900 ). *478 To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, an applicant must “first overcome the strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Myers, at ¶ 14 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

1996Ricehill; see, e.g., State v. Micko, 393 N.W.2d 741 (N.D.1986); State v. Patten, 353 N.W.2d 30 (N.D.1984).

1996Ricehill; see, e.g., State v. Micko, 393 N.W.2d 741 (N.D.1986); State v. Patten, 353 N.W.2d 30 (N.D.1984).

2019III [¶6] To succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the "defendant must first overcome the 'strong presumption' that trial counsel's representation fell within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance, and courts must consciously attempt to limit the distorting effect of hindsight." Rourke , 2018 ND 137 , ¶ 5, 912 N.W.2d 311 .

2019III [¶6] To succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the "defendant must first overcome the 'strong presumption' that trial counsel's representation fell within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance, and courts must consciously attempt to limit the distorting effect of hindsight." Rourke , 2018 ND 137 , ¶ 5, 912 N.W.2d 311 .

2017A petitioner must establish both in order to prevail. [¶ 7] “Effectiveness of counsel is measured by an ‘objective standard of reasonableness’ considering ‘prevailing professional norms.’ ” State v. Myers, 2009 ND 141, ¶ 14 , 770 N.W.2d 713 (quoting Clark v. State, 2008 ND 234, ¶ 12 , 758 N.W.2d 900 ). *478 To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, an applicant must “first overcome the strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Myers, at ¶ 14 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

2017A petitioner must establish both in order to prevail. [¶ 7] “Effectiveness of counsel is measured by an ‘objective standard of reasonableness’ considering ‘prevailing professional norms.’ ” State v. Myers, 2009 ND 141, ¶ 14 , 770 N.W.2d 713 (quoting Clark v. State, 2008 ND 234, ¶ 12 , 758 N.W.2d 900 ). *478 To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, an applicant must “first overcome the strong presumption that counsel’s conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Myers, at ¶ 14 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

2016“If it is easier [for the court] to dispose of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, that course should be followed.” Roth v. State, 2007 ND 112, ¶ 9 , 735 N.W.2d 882 (citing Wright v. State, 2005 ND 217, ¶ 11 , 707 N.W.2d 242 ). [¶-9] Thompson limits his argument on appeal to claiming his counsel was ineffective because his attorney relied on statements the State’s Attorney made that a DNA test was conducted and the results “were against” him.

2016“If it is easier [for the court] to dispose of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, that course should be followed.” Roth v. State, 2007 ND 112, ¶ 9 , 735 N.W.2d 882 (citing Wright v. State, 2005 ND 217, ¶ 11 , 707 N.W.2d 242 ). [¶-9] Thompson limits his argument on appeal to claiming his counsel was ineffective because his attorney relied on statements the State’s Attorney made that a DNA test was conducted and the results “were against” him.

2014See Bahtiraj v. State, 2013 ND 240, ¶ 8 , 840 N.W.2d 605 ; Patten v. State, 2008 ND 29, ¶ 9 , 745 N.W.2d 626 . [T]o prevail on a post-conviction relief application based on ineffective assistance of counsel, the petitioner must (1) “show that counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness” and (2) “show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 [ 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 ] (1984).

2014See Bahtiraj v. State, 2013 ND 240, ¶ 8 , 840 N.W.2d 605 ; Patten v. State, 2008 ND 29, ¶ 9 , 745 N.W.2d 626 . [T]o prevail on a post-conviction relief application based on ineffective assistance of counsel, the petitioner must (1) “show that counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness” and (2) “show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 [ 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 ] (1984).

2026Truelove v. State, 2020 ND 142, ¶ 11 , 945 N.W.2d 272 (“Trial strategy is the attorney’s province and on appeal, we do not second guess matters of trial tactics, such as the decision to call certain witnesses, hire private investigators, or how to question certain witnesses.” (cleaned up)); Broadwell v. State, 2014 ND 6, ¶ 7 , 841 N.W.2d 750 (“Courts need not address both elements of the ineffective assistance of counsel test, and if a court can dispose of the case by addressing only one element, it is encouraged to do so.”). [¶3] To the extent Davis attempted to raise other issues, those issu

2026Truelove v. State, 2020 ND 142, ¶ 11 , 945 N.W.2d 272 (“Trial strategy is the attorney’s province and on appeal, we do not second guess matters of trial tactics, such as the decision to call certain witnesses, hire private investigators, or how to question certain witnesses.” (cleaned up)); Broadwell v. State, 2014 ND 6, ¶ 7 , 841 N.W.2d 750 (“Courts need not address both elements of the ineffective assistance of counsel test, and if a court can dispose of the case by addressing only one element, it is encouraged to do so.”). [¶3] To the extent Davis attempted to raise other issues, those issu

2019In Ude v. State , 2009 ND 71 , ¶ 12, 764 N.W.2d 419 , we affirmed a summary judgment of an ineffective-assistance claim where a petitioner's response to the State's request for summary disposition did not present affidavits or other supporting materials to raise an issue of material fact.

2017“To avoid summary dismissal of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the post-conviction applicant must present some evidence that his counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and he must overcome the presumption that his counsel’s performance was within the broad range of reasonableness.” Id. (quoting Klose v. State, 2008 ND 143, ¶ 13 , 752 N.W.2d 192 ). [¶ 8] An applicant claiming, ineffective assistance of counsel has the ultimate burden of proving the two-prong test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.

2012“Whether a petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact and is fully renewable on appeal.” Sambursky , at ¶ 7. [¶ 13] Courts considering ineffective assistance of counsel claims apply a strong presumption that counsel’s conduct fell “within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Mathre v. State, 2000 ND 201, ¶3 , 619 N.W.2d 627 .

2012“Whether a petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact and is fully renewable on appeal.” Sambursky , at ¶ 7. [¶ 13] Courts considering ineffective assistance of counsel claims apply a strong presumption that counsel’s conduct fell “within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” Mathre v. State, 2000 ND 201, ¶3 , 619 N.W.2d 627 .

2011“To avoid summary dismissal of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the post-conviction applicant must present some evidence that his counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and he must overcome the presumption that his counsel’s performance was within the broad range of reasonableness.” Klose, 2008 ND 143, ¶ 13 , 752 N.W.2d 192 . “ ‘To demonstrate prejudice, the [applicant] must establish a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different, and the defendant must specify how and where counsel

2011“To avoid summary dismissal of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the post-conviction applicant must present some evidence that his counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and he must overcome the presumption that his counsel’s performance was within the broad range of reasonableness.” Klose, 2008 ND 143, ¶ 13 , 752 N.W.2d 192 . “ ‘To demonstrate prejudice, the [applicant] must establish a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different, and the defendant must specify how and where counsel

2010And he alleged his first-application counsel had a conflict of interest in failing to amend the application to include an ineffective assistance of counsel claim against his direct-appeal counsel because both his first-application counsel and his direct-appeal counsel worked in the same firm. [¶ 8] The district court summarily dismissed Johnson’s sufficiency of the evidence claim on its own motion as res judi-cata, believing our previous holding in State v. Johnson, 2008 ND 168 , 756 N.W.2d 548 (per curiam) directly disposed of Johnson’s claims.

2010And he alleged his first- application counsel had a conflict of interest in failing to amend the application to include an ineffective assistance of counsel claim against his direct-appeal counsel because both his first-application counsel and his direct-appeal counsel worked in the same firm. [¶8] The district court summarily dismissed Johnson’s sufficiency of the evidence claim on its own motion as res judicata, believing our previous holding in State v. Johnson , 2008 ND 168 , 756 N.W.2d 548 (per curiam) directly disposed of Johnson’s claims.