White v. Kelley, No. 14-3482 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant, convicted of first degree murder, appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition. Defendant claimed that his counsel’s last-minute change of trial strategy and failure to allow him to testify violated his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel. The state court concluded that, although counsel's performance was deficient, defendant was not prejudiced under Strickland v. Washington where defendant failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's error, the result of the proceeding would have been different. The court concluded that the state court did not unreasonably apply Strickland to the facts of defendants case. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Benton, Author, with Murphy and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Prisoner case - Habeas. The Arkansas courts did not unreasonably apply Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) in determining that counsel's decision to make a last-minute change in defense strategy which deprived him from testifying about justification as White cannot show a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional error, the result of the proceeding would have been different.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.