Teddy Robbins, Jr. v. State of Tennessee, E2016-01531-CCA-R3-PC

Robbins was convicted by a jury of domestic assault, aggravated assault, especially aggravated kidnapping, and aggravated rape; aggregated sentence 50 years; convictions affirmed on direct appeal.
At trial the victim testified to prolonged physical and sexual assaults with a knife; physical evidence included torn clothing and visible injuries; no semen found on clothing.
Defense identification issues: Denzil Stevens was present in court and thus excluded; defense witness "Neal" was not served reliably and was not produced at trial after counsel declined the court’s offer to issue a subpoena instanter.
Post-conviction petition alleged ineffective assistance for multiple omissions; petitioner limited asserted prejudice on appeal to trial counsel’s failure to procure Neal’s testimony to impeach the victim.
Trial counsel (first jury trial experience) testified he spent months trying to locate Neal, issued subpoenas, used an investigator, and made tactical decisions not to call certain witnesses; some prior counsel had interviewed Neal with mixed results about his willingness/credibility.
The post-conviction court credited trial counsel, found Neal not credible, and concluded petitioner failed to show deficient performance or prejudice; appellate court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel performed deficiently by failing to secure Neal's testimony	Counsel failed to locate/interview Neal and waived an instanter subpoena; this shows deficient preparation	Counsel spent months locating Neal, issued subpoenas, used an investigator, and Neal was intermittently unavailable; decisions were strategic	No — court credited counsel’s efforts and found no deficient performance
Whether failure to call Neal prejudiced the defense	Neal would have impeached the victim’s rape testimony and created reasonable probability of different outcome	Neal’s post-conviction testimony was not credible and his statements did not materially contradict the victim; no reasonable probability of different result	No — court found no prejudice and affirmed denial of relief

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong ineffective-assistance test requiring deficiency and prejudice)
Grindstaff v. State, 297 S.W.3d 208 (Tenn. 2009) (standard for clear-and-convincing proof in post-conviction proceedings)
Vaughn v. State, 202 S.W.3d 106 (Tenn. 2006) (standard for reviewing ineffective-assistance claims)
Felts v. State, 354 S.W.3d 266 (Tenn. 2011) (deference to strategic choices made after reasonable investigation)
Moore v. State, 485 S.W.3d 411 (Tenn. 2016) (strategic decisions are protected only when based on adequate preparation)
Honeycutt v. State, 54 S.W.3d 762 (Tenn. 2001) (appellate review defers to post-conviction fact findings on credibility)
Ward v. State, 315 S.W.3d 461 (Tenn. 2010) (post-conviction factual findings are conclusive unless preponderance of evidence shows otherwise)
Finch v. State, 226 S.W.3d 307 (Tenn. 2007) (petitioner must prove both deficiency and prejudice)
Goad v. State, 938 S.W.2d 363 (Tenn. 1996) (court need not address both prongs if petitioner fails on one)
Berry v. State, 366 S.W.3d 160 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2011) (presumption of prejudice only in cases of complete denial of counsel)