Dahl v. State, 826 N.W.2d 922

Dahl appealed a district court denial of post-conviction relief.
He alleged ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel.
In 2008 Dahl was a suspect in a rural Steele County standoff, charged with reckless endangerment and attempted murder.
A competency evaluation found Dahl competent to stand trial; he raised lack of criminal responsibility as a defense.
Jury trial occurred; final jury instructions included lack of criminal responsibility and three verdict forms; Dahl was convicted of attempted murder and reckless endangerment; direct appeal in 2010 affirmed.
In 2011 Dahl sought post-conviction relief; district court denied; this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance for not seeking bifurcation	Dahl	Dahl’s counsel failed to request bifurcation under §12.1-04.1-16	No reversible error; no reasonable probability of different outcome
Ineffective assistance for failing to obtain verdict form for LCR	Dahl	Counsel did not err; final instructions allowed LCR defense and outcomes	No reversible error; record supports alternative, but not prejudice

Kruckenberg v. State, 2012 ND 162 (ND (2012)) (ineffective assistance framework; test for prejudice)
Murchison v. State, 2011 ND 126 (ND (2011)) (clarifies prejudice standard for IAC)
Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (U.S. (2000)) (defining prejudice as a reasonable probability of different outcome)
Noorlun v. State, 2007 ND 118 (ND (2007)) (limits on second-guessing trial strategy)
Smestad v. State, 2011 ND 163 (ND (2011)) (prejudice showing in post-conviction IAC)
Flanagan v. State, 2006 ND 76 (ND (2006)) (reasonable probability standard for prejudice)