State v. Polak

3 Citing cases

  1. State v. Oliver

    2022 MT 104 (Mont. 2022)   Cited 4 times

    To show ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must prove counsel's performance was deficient and counsel's deficient performance prejudiced the defense. State v. Polak, 2021 MT 307, ¶ 23, 406 Mont. 421, 499 P.3d 565. We will only review allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal when the claim is "based on facts of record in the underlying case."

  2. State v. Grana

    2022 MT 65 (Mont. 2022)

    ¶17 Failure to object in the trial court generally constitutes a waiver of the right to raise an issue on appeal. See State v. Polak, 2021 MT 307, ¶ 9, 406 Mont. 421, 499 P.3d 565. This Court "may undertake review of an unpreserved assertion of error under the plain error doctrine in situations that implicate a defendant's fundamental constitutional rights when failing to review the alleged error may result in manifest miscarriage of justice, leave unsettled the question of the fundamental fairness of the proceedings, or compromise the integrity of the judicial process."

  3. Hartman v. Knudsen

    CV 22-57-M-DLC (D. Mont. Aug. 12, 2022)   Cited 1 times

    If counsel performs unreasonably, a severely prejudiced defendant will have a new trial. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 692 (1984); State v. Polak, 499 P.3d 565, 572 ¶ 23 (Mont. 2021); Whitlow v. State, 183 P.3d 861, 864 ¶¶ 10-11, 867-68 ¶¶ 20-21 (Mont. 2008). By contrast, only the client can decide certain matters, such as the “fundamental objective” of the representation, whether to plead guilty or stand trial, whether to appeal, and whether to testify at trial. See, e.g., McCoy v. Louisiana, __ U.S. __, 138 S.Ct. 1500, 1508 (2018).