Issue

Effective assistance of counsel—trial counsel—right to testify at trial—appellate counsel—Anders brief—motion for appropriate relief

Summary

The denial of a criminal defendant's motion for appropriate relief (MAR) was affirmed where defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) lacked merit. With respect to his first IAC claim, the record did not support defendant's argument that his trial counsel had neither informed him of his right to testify at trial nor allowed him to testify despite his desire to do so; rather, the trial court's colloquy with defendant revealed that defendant was aware of his right to testify, and nothing in the record suggested that defendant intended to exercise that right. With respect to defendant's second IAC claim, defendant's appellate counsel–who filed an Anders brief in defendant's appeal–was not ineffective for declining to argue that the trial court erred in limiting the testimony of defendant's expert witness, since defendant's MAR failed to demonstrate that the court abused its discretion in limiting that testimony.

Summary from the North Carolina Reports digest (official subject index). Read the opinion →