Windom v. Secretary, Department of Corrections

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it “was not objectively unreasonable” for the state post-conviction court to find no prejudice where there was overwhelming evidence of premeditation, despite counsel’s “failure to investigate and present a mental health mitigation de- fense”
• “Because the adequacy of an attorney’s performance is measured against an objective standard of reasonableness, the fact that trial counsel admits that his performance was lacking is of little, if any, consequence.”
• “[T]he fail- ure to demonstrate either deficient performance or prejudice is dis- positive[.]”
• “[A]ny potential benefit to be gained by presenting the relatively weak mitigating evidence in Windom’s case would have been severely undercut by rebuttal evidence of his own misconduct, specifically, his involvement in a large-scale drug-dealing operation.”
• “Because the failure to demonstrate either deficient performance or prejudice is dispositive . . ., there is no reason for a court deciding an ineffective assistance claim to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one.”
• “Because the failure to demonstrate either deficient performance or prejudice is dispositive . . ., there is no reason for a court deciding an ineffective assistance claim to address both components of the inquiry if the defendant makes an insufficient showing of one.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).