Lichau v. Baldwin, 333 Or. 350

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court held that defense counsel provided constitutionally inadequate assistance by withdrawing the defendant's alibi defense without conducting a reasonable investigation of military records and potential alibi witnesses. The court concluded that the omitted alibi evidence had a tendency to affect the trial's outcome and reversed the Court of Appeals, affirming the post-conviction court's grant of relief.

Holdings

1. A tactical decision by trial counsel is entitled to deference only when it is grounded in a reasonable investigation; counsel's decision to limit investigation of an alibi defense was not reasonable where counsel knew that military records and potential witnesses could establish the defendant's whereabouts but failed to pursue them.
2. Counsel's withdrawal of Lichau's alibi defense was not a reasonable exercise of professional skill and judgment because counsel lacked the information necessary to evaluate the prosecutor's alleged basket-leave evidence as a result of counsel's unreasonably limited investigation.
3. Evidence need not conclusively establish the defendant's alibi to satisfy Oregon's prejudice standard; evidence has a tendency to affect the result when it could materially influence the jury's assessment of whether the defendant was present at the alleged crime and the credibility of competing accounts.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel exercised reasonable professional skill and judgment by limiting the investigation of Lichau's military-record and witness-based alibi defense.
2. Whether counsel's withdrawal of the alibi defense, based on the prosecutor's unproduced basket-leave evidence, constituted inadequate assistance of counsel.
3. Whether the absence of the alibi evidence had a tendency to affect the result of the criminal prosecution.
4. Whether Lichau was entitled to post-conviction relief and a new trial under Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded