Newton v. State, 455 Md. 341

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals held that Donta Newton failed to establish ineffective assistance of trial counsel based on counsel’s consent to an alternate juror’s presence during deliberations, because the court instructed the alternate not to participate and Newton did not show prejudice under Strickland v. Washington. The court also held that Newton failed to establish ineffective assistance of appellate counsel based on the failure to raise the issue as plain error. The court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals.

Holdings

1. Newton failed to establish ineffective assistance of trial counsel because he did not demonstrate Strickland prejudice. The presence of the instructed alternate did not render the proceeding fundamentally unfair, and the court presumed that, had counsel objected, the trial judge would have acted according to Maryland Rule 4-312(g)(3) and excused the alternate.
2. Newton failed to establish ineffective assistance of appellate counsel because he could not show a reasonable probability that he would have prevailed on appeal had counsel raised the issue.
3. Newton waived a direct postconviction challenge to the trial court's error because he did not raise the issue at trial or on direct appeal and did not allege special circumstances excusing the waiver.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for consenting to the presence of an alternate juror during deliberations.
2. Whether appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue on direct appeal that the alternate juror's presence constituted plain error.
3. Whether structural-error prejudice is presumed when an ineffective-assistance claim is based on counsel's failure to object to an alleged structural error.

Disposition

affirmed