In re Marriage of Burmeister

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the request for expert assistance made before trial satisfied the timeliness requirement
• explaining that when proposed testimony is cumulative, the denial of funds for the proposed expert does not render the trial fundamentally unfair
• noting that “[t]he jury was entitled to discredit [petitioner’s] testimony” that “he killed [the victim] in self-defense”
• explaining that the additional requirements in Moore and Stephens should not be considered in determining a trial court's reasonableness in denying funds if the trial occurred before those cases were decided
• no presumption of prejudice where defense counsel had thirty-seven days to prepare for capital case
• “ ‘Which witnesses, if any, to call, and when to call them, is the epitome of a strategic decision, and it is one that we will seldom, if ever, second guess.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).