Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Jimothy A. Jenkins

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided July 11, 2014No. 2012AP000046-CRPublished

1DissentAnnette Kingsland Ziegler, J.

¶ 99. (dissenting). I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. In my view, Jenkins did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel in the case at issue. Given the highly deferential standard and the presumption in favor of finding that counsel's performance was objectively reasonable, I conclude that counsel's performance *216was neither deficient, nor was Jenkins prejudiced by counsel's alleged failures, such that there is a "reasonable probability" that the result of the proceeding would have been different. Further, I conclude that Jenkins is not entitled to a new trial in the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. State v. ThielWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State v. BallietteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State v. HarperWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API