 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Russell v. State11/27/2002
No. 4640
In 1994, Dan L. Russell was convicted of first-degree sexual assault upon his estranged wife, T.R.. We affirmed his conviction on appeal. See Russell v. State, 934 P.2d 1335 (Alaska App. 1997). In 1998, Russell filed a petition for post-conviction relief. He asserted that his trial attorney, Assistant Public Defender David Seid, had not investigated or prepared his case properly. After a lengthy evidentiary hearing, the superior court denied Russell's petition for post-conviction relief. Russell now appeals that decision.
In order to understand Russell's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, one must know (1) the evidence at Russell's trial, (2) the other evidence that the defense attorney knew was available, and (3) still other evidence that the defense attorney did not know about, but was potentially available. In addition, one must know (4) the strategies pursued by the prosecutor and Russell's attorney at trial, and (5) the alternative defense strategies that were potentially available. All of this is explained in detail below.
Generally speaking, Russell's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel rest on the assertion that his trial attorney failed to anticipate, and then failed to adequately investigate and rebut, the State's evidence that Russell had assaulted T.R. in the past and that T.R. was a "battered woman" - i.e., a woman who, having been physically abused by her husband, voluntarily returned to him and was physically abused again. Russell contends that, if his defense attorney had competently prepared the case, the attorney would have discovered evidence to convincingly rebut, or at least seriously undercut, the State's allegations of prior marital assaults and the State's assertion that T.R. was a battered woman. In addition, Russell contends that if his attorney had competently investigated the case, the attorney would have been able to file a successful motion for production of T.R.'s counseling records - records that, according to Russell, would have undermined T.R.'s credibility as a witness by showing that she had psychological problems that affected her ability to perceive reality.
As we explain below, we uphold the superior court's ruling that Russell's trial attorney represented him competently. In particular, we uphold the superior court's findings (1) that Russell's trial attorney acted reasonably when he decided not to challenge the State's assertions that Russell assaulted T.R. in August and September, 1993; and (2) that Russell's trial attorney acted reasonably when he decided not to initiate a major fight on the issue of whether T.R. was a "battered woman". Finally, we uphold the superior court's finding that, based on what Russell's trial attorney knew and reasonably could have found out about T.R.'s mental condition, the trial attorney could not have successfully moved for disclosure of T.R.'s counseling records.
A. The Facts of Russell's Criminal Case and How It Was Litigated
The basic facts of the underlying prosecution
Russell was accused of raping T.R., his estranged wife, while the two of them were alone in Russell's hotel room in Ketchikan on July 1, 1994.
Russell and T.R. had separated four months earlier, in March. After the separation, Russell and T.R. began marital counseling with Susan Jordan at the Gateway Center, but Russell stopped attending after several sessions. T.R. continued to see Jordan by herself.
In early May, Russell left town to work on Prince of Wales Island. T.R. obtained dissolution papers from the court and sent them to Russell, but he refused to sign them.
Also in May, T.R. obtained a domesti
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Alaska Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|