Bullock v. Carver

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that speculation about the “potential[ ] exculpatory nature” of evidence requires a showing of bad faith to prove a due pro- cess violation
• stating that strategic or tactical choices “are presumed correct, unless they were completely unreasonable, -not merely, wrong” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• stating that “clairvoyance is not a required attribute of effective representation” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that the defendant has the burden to show “that counsel’s action or inaction was not based on a valid strategic choice”
• stating that “we give considerable deference to an attorney’s strategic decisions”
• noting that Trombetta and Youngblood may apply when police fail to preserve interview notes or recordings, but that it is unclear whether that framework applies when the police fail to take notes or record an interview in the first instance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).