Sarwacinski v. State

I respectfully dissent.

In this appeal, David Sarwacinski, who was charged and convicted of murder, claims his counsel was inadequate because counsel failed to submit a jury instruction on voluntary manslaughter-thus depriving the jury of the option of finding him guilty of the lesser, voluntary manslaughter offense. His counsel's strategy was apparently based on the existence of a meritorious self-defense claim based on the fact that Sarwacinski was defending his home and family against a much larger and younger, drunken man who refused to leave the premises.1 Counsel apparently believed that…