Croy v. State, 2011 Ark. 284

Croy appeals the denial of his Rule 37.1 postconviction relief, arguing ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
A 2006 jury sentenced Croy to 360 months on two counts of first-degree sexual assault; direct appeal upheld.
Trial evidence included a teenage victim’s testimony of inappropriate touching progressing to oral sex and attempted anal sex, and alienation of the victim from his parents.
The State admitted Rule 404(b) witnesses who had similar relationships with Croy; their testimony was highly probative of propensity and credibility.
The Rule 37.1 petition was denied after a hearing with written findings; issues included four alleged deficiencies of trial counsel.
The court reviews for clear error, applying the Strickland two-prong standard for ineffective assistance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance re skin-tag evidence	Croy claims counsel failed to investigate and use a clearer skin-tag photo.	Counsel strategically chose not to question witnesses about the skin tag to avoid damaging testimony.	No prejudice; strategy reasonable; photo adequacy supported.
Failure to present additional character witnesses	Additional witnesses would have aided sentencing and defense.	Petitioner did not prove these witnesses would have altered outcome.	No prejudice; other witnesses already presented; no likelihood of different outcome.
Failure to preserve Rule 403 objection to 404(b) testimony	Rule 403 balancing should have excluded remote 404(b) evidence.	Court found probative value outweighed prejudice; argument not preserved for appeal.	Not error; evidence was highly probative and not clearly prejudicial.
Failure to obtain prosecution notes (Brady issue)	Notes could reveal exculpatory information; counsel should have obtained them.	Discovery not required under Rule 37; notes not shown to be favorable or suppressed.	No ineffective assistance; no Brady violation established.

Payton v. State, 2011 Ark. 217 (Ark. 2011) (standard for reviewing Rule 37.1 claims; clear-error review and Strickland two-prong test)
Anderson v. State, 2010 Ark. 404 (Ark. 2010) (totality of evidence in evaluating effectiveness of counsel)
Shipman v. State, 2010 Ark. 499 (Ark. 2010) (two-prong Strickland standard applied to ineffective assistance claims)
Kelley v. State, 2011 Ark. 175 (Ark. 2011) (trial strategy is presumptively reasonable; burden on defendant to prove prejudice)
Miller v. State, 2011 Ark. 114 (Ark. 2011) (standard for governing deficient performance under Strickland)
Carter v. State, 2011 Ark. 226 (Ark. 2011) (prejudice requirement for ineffective assistance)