|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|Felipe Pereida-Alba v. Rick Coursey|
|Supreme Court Case 3|
|Erin C Lagesen on behalf of Rick Coursey|
Erin Galli on behalf of Felipe Pereida-Alba
Statement of Issues:
|Felipe Pereida-Alba v. Rick Coursey (S060846) (A146174) (appeal from Umatilla County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 252 Or App 66, 284 P3d 1280 (2012)).|
Defendant Rick Coursey, Superintendent of the Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution, has been granted review of a Court of Appeals decision that affirmed a post-conviction court's decision to grant post-conviction relief to petitioner Felipe Pereida-Alba based on the failure of petitioner's legal counsel in his underlying criminal case to request a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense.
On review, the issues are:
(1) When a post-conviction petitioner alleges that his trial counsel provided constitutionally inadequate assistance by not requesting an instruction for a lesser-included offense, what must the petitioner show to establish that his counsel's performance was deficient?
(2) Assuming that all reasonable trial attorneys would have requested an instruction for a lesser-included offense, what must a petitioner prove to establish that his counsel's failure to request an instruction prejudiced him?
The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating: