Rodney Dubois v. State of Montana

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Rodney Dubois’s petition for postconviction relief based on alleged ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. The court held that trial counsel’s decision not to seek a new trial based on a witness’s recantation and appellate counsel’s decision not to raise certain issues were objectively reasonable. The noncitable memorandum opinion was issued pursuant to the Montana Supreme Court’s internal operating rules.

Holdings

1. Trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance by declining to move for a new trial because the recantation was written under suspicious circumstances, did not materially strengthen Dubois's self-defense claim, and was unlikely to affect the verdict in light of the evidence.
2. Appellate counsel was not ineffective because counsel need not raise every colorable issue and Dubois failed to show that the omitted issues were clearly stronger than the issues counsel presented.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to move for a new trial based on a prosecution witness's recantation letter.
2. Whether appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance by declining to raise on direct appeal the denial of reassignment of counsel, the constitutional challenge to Montana Code Annotated § 45-2-203, and the discovery request for the criminal records of the State's witnesses.

Disposition

affirmed