Melissa Louise Stephens v. Rob Persson, Coffee Creek Correctional Facility

In order to establish that counsel provided inadequate counsel for purposes of Article I, section 11, one must prove two elements: (1) a performance element: that trial counsel “failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment”; and (2) a prejudice element: that “petitioner suffered prejudice as a result of counsel’s inadequacy.” Johnson v. Premo, 361 Or 688, 699, 399 P3d 431 (2017).

Petitioner appealed conviction of first degree rape, first getee of sexual assault, and first degree sodomy. On appeal, petitioner assigned error to the post-conviction court’s denial of relief based on errors due to methods counsel used to present evidence or counsel’s failure to present evidence. Petitioner further argued that even if each act individually was not prejudicial, the cumulative effective of these acts warrant a grant of post-conviction relief. In order to establish that counsel provided inadequate counsel for purposes of Article I, section 11, one must prove two elements: (1) a performance element: that trial counsel “failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment”; and (2) a prejudice ele­ment: that “petitioner suffered prejudice as a result of coun­sel’s inadequacy.” Johnson v. Premo, 361 Or 688, 699, 399 P3d 431 (2017). The Court held that petitioner did not demonstrate that counsel failed to meet the standard for adequate representa­tion, the strategies used by counsel were not unreasonable and did not have a tendency to affect the verdict. Affirmed.