Stau v. Taylor

Under Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, a party may prove that trial counsel rendered inadequate assistance if they prove (1) a performance element, or a failure to exercise reasonable professional judgement, and (2) a prejudice element, that the party suffered prejudice as a result of the inadequacy. See Johnson v. Premo, 361 Or 688, 699, 399 P3d 431 (2017).

Petitioner appealed a post-conviction finding that defense counsel provided adequate assistance.  Petitioner assigned error to the post conviction court's denial of relief for inadequate assistance of counsel.  On appeal, Petitioner argued that trial counsel's decision to waive closing statements violated his rights to adequate assistance of counsel under Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution and the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution.  Under Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, a party may prove that trial counsel rendered inadequate assistance if they prove (1) a performance element, or a failure to exercise reasonable professional judgement, and (2) a prejudice element, that the party suffered prejudice as a result of the inadequacy. See Johnson v. Premo, 361 Or 688, 699, 399 P3d 431 (2017).  The Court found that trial counsel's decision to give up the "last clear chance to persuade the trier of fact that there may be reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt" had more than a mere possibility of affecting the jury's guilty verdict.  Reversed and remanded.