Edward Stevens v. State

Judge LANSING,

Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part.

I fully concur in all parts of the foregoing opinion except Section 11(B)(2)(a) concerning the failure of Stevens’ defense attorneys to discover and present evidence that the child’s eyes were removed after the body was embalmed. If I were able to address this issue on a clean slate, I would also concur in the majority’s opinion affirming the district judge’s finding that defense counsel did not render deficient performance because a competent attorney reasonably would not have sought out the embalming report. We are not, however,…