United States v. Alejandro J. Villalpando

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that some strategy decisions are so unreasonable that they can support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel
• affirming district court’s conclusion that counsel rendered deficient performance by eliciting from government witness harmful testimony that defendant was “threatening and murderous”
• finding Rule 33 motion timely where supplemental briefing was requested by court and raised same argument as original motion
• “[C]ross-examination techniques, like other matters of trial strategy, [are entrusted] to the professional discretion of counsel.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).