- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Civil Procedure
- Date Filed: 04-14-2021
- Case #: A170197
- Judge(s)/Court Below: James, J. for the Court; Lagesen, P.J., & Kamins, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Petitioner appealed a grant of summary judgment. Petitioner assigned error to the trial court’s dismissal of his claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. On appeal, Petitioner argued that his counsel was inadequate and ineffective in failing to investigate the defense of guilty except for insanity (GEI). “For claims of ineffective counsel based on failure to investigate, establishing the performance prong is a fact specific endeavor, which must consider the ‘context of the legal proceeding at issue.’” Snyder v. Amsberry, 306 Or. App. 439, 449-450 (2020). To satisfy this standard, Petitioner must show that counsel failed to “exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment” and that “counsel’s failure had a tendency to affect the result of his trial.” Additionally, Petitioner must “adduce evidence” of what trial counsel “would have discovered” assuming counsel would have pursued the investigation. The Court determined that Petitioner did not produce evidence as to what the results of the investigation into a GEI defense might have been. Accordingly, the Court held that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgement. Affirmed.