Sandrelli v. State, 2017 Ark. 156

Defendant Robert Sandrelli was tried twice on four counts of rape against his 14-year-old son; first trial ended in a hung jury, second produced convictions on all counts.
On direct appeal the convictions were affirmed; Sandrelli then filed a Rule 37.1 petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at the second trial.
Three claims were raised: (1) counsel was under stress (deemed conclusory); (2) counsel failed to call any character witnesses at the second trial; and (3) counsel unilaterally decided Sandrelli would not testify.
This Court remanded for an evidentiary hearing on claims (2) and (3) to determine whether counsel’s decisions were supported by reasonable professional judgment rather than speculation.
At the remand hearing, trial counsel Ray Spruell testified he recommended not calling witnesses and advised Sandrelli not to testify; Spruell said Sandrelli agreed. Sandrelli testified he intended to testify and was not asked to decide; one character witness’s testimony conflicted with counsel’s account.
The circuit court credited counsel, found his tactical decisions reasonable, found Sandrelli not credible, and denied relief; this Court affirmed the denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel’s failure to call character witnesses at the second trial was deficient performance	Sandrelli: absence of character witnesses distinguished the two trials and counsel failed to discuss/decide this with him	State: counsel reasonably concluded prior witnesses were ineffective or might be harmful; tactical choice	Held: No deficient performance; trial court’s credibility finding for counsel was not clearly erroneous
Whether counsel unilaterally decided defendant would not testify	Sandrelli: counsel never asked him and deprived him of the decision	State: counsel advised against testifying, explained risks and defendant agreed	Held: No deficient performance; court credited counsel and found Sandrelli’s testimony not believable
Whether failure to place a waiver of the right to testify on the record is per se ineffective assistance	Sandrelli: counsel failed to put waiver on record	State: waiver need not be on the record to avoid ineffective-assistance finding	Held: Not per se ineffective; prior precedent rejects that rule
Whether the circuit court erred in resolving credibility conflicts on remand	Sandrelli: court focused on points favoring counsel and ignored contrary evidence	State: credibility determinations are for the trial court	Held: No error; credibility and factual findings were for the circuit court and not clearly erroneous

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (established the two-prong ineffective-assistance standard)
Feuget v. State, 2015 Ark. 43 (discusses burden to show deficient performance and prejudice)
Lemaster v. State, 2015 Ark. 167 (standard for appellate review of postconviction factual findings)
Fukunaga v. State, 2016 Ark. 164 (no need to address both Strickland prongs if one is insufficient)
Noel v. State, 342 Ark. 35 (trial strategy/tactics fall within counsel’s professional judgment)
Williams v. State, 2011 Ark. 489 (failure to make a record of waiver to testify is not per se ineffective assistance)
Atchison v. State, 298 Ark. 344 (credibility determinations are within the trial court’s province)