Brasda v. State

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Rayland Brasda’s petition for postconviction relief. The court held that counsel was not deficient in challenging the admission of a knife and, in any event, Brasda failed to establish prejudice under the Strickland ineffective-assistance standard.

Holdings

1. Brasda failed to establish that counsel's performance was deficient because counsel initially objected to the knife's admission, requiring the State to lay a testimonial foundation concerning whether the knife's condition had been altered.
2. Brasda failed to establish a reasonable probability that, absent counsel's alleged errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different; admission of the knife was not sufficiently prejudicial to undermine confidence in the verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to properly object to the admission of the knife and by failing to request a jury instruction concerning alleged police manipulation of the knife.
2. Whether Brasda established prejudice under the second prong of the Strickland ineffective-assistance test.

Disposition

affirmed