Corzo v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that there is probably a high correlation between errors that may be corrected as fundamental errors on direct appeal in the absence of preservation and errors that may be corrected as ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal
• explaining ineffective assistance of counsel claim on postconviction relief motion is procedurally barred when prior opinion on direct appeal expressly addresses issue of ineffective assistance of counsel
• “On rare occasions, the appellate courts make an exception to this [general] rule when the ineffectiveness is obvious on the face of the appellate record, the prejudice caused by the conduct is indisputable, and a tactical explanation for the conduct is inconceivable.”
• “There is probably a high correlation between errors that may be corrected as fundamental error on direct appeal in the absence of preservation by trial counsel ... and errors that may be corrected as ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal.”
• ineffective assistance of counsel claims may be considered on direct appeal only “when the ineffectiveness is obvious on the face of the appellate record, the prejudice caused by the conduct is indisputable, and a tactical explanation of the conduct is inconceivable.”
• “There is probably a high correlation between errors that may be corrected as fundamental error on direct appeal in the absence of preservation by trial counsel . . . and errors that may be corrected as ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).