Kevin Sellers, Applicant-Appellant v. State of Iowa, 16-0587

Kevin Sellers was charged with second-degree murder for beating his girlfriend, Laura Welch; parties amended charges to attempted murder and two counts of willful injury causing serious injury and proceeded to a bench trial on the minutes of testimony.
At the bench trial on the minutes Sellers was convicted as charged; his direct appeal (affirmed) included a sufficiency challenge to attempted murder.
Sellers filed for postconviction relief asserting ineffective assistance of counsel: (1) counsel were unprepared and coerced him into a bench trial on the minutes rather than a jury murder trial, and (2) counsel failed to adequately discredit jailhouse informant Larry Cox.
At the PCR evidentiary hearing Sellers testified his lawyers pressured him to accept the bench trial, he saw little preparation, and Cox’s account exaggerated Sellers’s statements and conflicted with medical evidence.
The district court denied relief; on de novo review the Court of Appeals found counsel made strategic decisions after investigation, were diligent, Sellers knowingly waived his jury right, Cox was credible, and Sellers failed to prove deficient performance or prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Whether counsel were ineffective for being unprepared and coercing Sellers into a bench trial on the minutes	Sellers: counsel pressured him to waive jury, were unprepared, and he lacked a viable defense if he refused their recommendation	State: counsel investigated, conferred with Sellers, prepared for jury up to the waiver, and the waiver was knowing and voluntary after colloquy	Held: No ineffective assistance — strategic, investigated decision; waiver was knowing and not coerced
2. Whether counsel were ineffective for failing to discredit/impeach jailhouse informant Larry Cox	Sellers: counsel should have attacked Cox’s credibility and inconsistencies with medical evidence	State: counsel deposed Cox, concluded he was credible and had nonpublic corroborating details; tactical decision to avoid attempting impeachment	Held: No ineffective assistance — counsel diligence and reasonable strategy; failure to impeach was not a breach
3. Whether Cox’s testimony violated Marshall and should have been excluded	Sellers: Cox obtained statements in violation of Marshall and should be excluded	State: issue was not raised below; not preserved for appellate review	Held: Not considered on appeal due to failure to preserve issue

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
Ledzema v. State, 626 N.W.2d 134 (Iowa 2001) (strategic decisions after reasonable investigation are virtually unchallengeable)
Lado v. State, 804 N.W.2d 248 (Iowa 2011) (errors in trial strategy or judgment normally do not establish ineffective assistance)
Waters v. Iowa Dist. Ct., 783 N.W.2d 487 (Iowa 2010) (postconviction proceedings generally reviewed for corrections of errors at law)
Lamasters v. State, 821 N.W.2d 856 (Iowa 2012) (ineffective assistance more likely when failures reflect lack of diligence rather than exercise of judgment)