Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Rose

United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals

Decided February 12, 2009No. ACM 36508Published

1DissentThompson, Judge

I join the majority’s opinion on all issues except the appellant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim. There I must respectfully dissent.

As the majority notes, affirmatively misleading a criminal defendant about significant collateral consequences of a criminal conviction can rise to the level of ineffective assistance of counsel. United States v. Kwan, 407 F.3d 1005, 1015-16 (9th Cir.2005); United States v. Couto, 311 F.3d 179, 187-88, 191 (2d Cir.2002). However, this is not such a case. Rather, for the reasons set forth below, I find the appellant failed to establish an affirmative…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. United States v. GrostefonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1982
  4. United States v. TimmreckSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. United States v. CareUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1969

10 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