Decay v. State, 2014 Ark. 387

Gregory Decay was convicted of two counts of capital murder and sentenced to death; this Court affirmed the convictions and sentence.
Decay filed a Rule 37.5 postconviction petition; the circuit court denied and dismissed it.
This Court previously reversed on remand for written findings of fact and conclusions of law; the circuit court issued such findings.
Decay asserted five ineffective-assistance claims and a defense-of-choice prejudice claim; the circuit court denied relief on all.
This Court reviews the circuit court’s findings under a de novo standard for ineffective assistance claims using Strickland’s two-prong test.
This opinion affirms the circuit court, holding no deficient performance or prejudice on the asserted claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Mitigation investigation/presentation	Decay alleges counsel failed to investigate/develop/present mitigation.	State contends counsel actively pursued mitigation and adequately presented evidence.	Not deficient; no prejudice found.
Objection to prosecutor's comment on failure to testify	Decay asserts counsel should have objected to remarks implying failure to testify/remorse.	State contends remarks were not a prohibited comment on testimony and were permissible.	No error; objections would have been meritless.
Objection to prosecutor's comment on release eligibility	Decay argues voir dire comment biased jurors against life without parole.	State says comment clarified law; no prejudice shown.	No reversible error; no demonstrated prejudice.
Defense-of-choice not advanced	Decay claims trial counsel failed to present his chosen defense.	State argues defense strategy was reasonable and supported by the record.	No deficient performance; trial strategy was within reasonable professional judgment.
Prejudice in defense-of-choice prejudice presumption	Decay contends prejudice should be presumed for defense-of-choice failure.	State asserts prejudice must be shown and is not demonstrated here.	Prejudice not established; presumption rejected.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (two-prong standard for ineffective assistance)
Echols v. State, 354 Ark. 530 (Ark. 2003) (investigating mitigating evidence; prejudice analysis)
Coulter v. State, 31 S.W.3d 826 (Ark. 2000) (totality of evidence when evaluating mitigation)
Anderson v. State, 385 S.W.3d 783 (Ark. 2011) (strong presumption of reasonable professional assistance)
Noel v. State, 26 S.W.3d 123 (Ark. 2000) (defense strategy and trial tactics; not every argument must be pursued)
Jones v. State, 10 S.W.3d 449 (Ark. 2000) (prosecutor’s remarks regarding remorse; test for improper comment)