Ylst

Smith v. Ylst

Good Law
78 F. App'x 590
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 16, 2003No. 01-15550; D.C. No. CV-92-00170-LKKCalifornia734 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Christopher Gilbert Smith (“Smith”) contends that his trial counsel failed to investigate, failed to argue the constitutional validity of Smith’s confession, committed trial errors in failing to call experts or additional witnesses for the defense, failed to confer with Smith on defense matters, and refused to let Smith testify. Smith also asserts that his attorney was distracted by personal problems and by work on another case.

Smith has failed to demonstrate that his legal representation fell “below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). Smith’s trial counsel’s predecessor retained an investigator and conducted a thorough investigation, including interviewing witnesses and conducting other discovery. Trial counsel had available to him the results of this investigation. Counsel’s tactical decisions about experts, additional witnesses, and Smith’s defense were reasonable in view of Smith’s confession and the circumstances of the trial. Smith’s disagreement with his trial attorney’s “tactical decision[s] cannot form the basis for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.”…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.