Michael Arlie Feuget, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee — Danielson, J., Concurring

Summary

The concurring opinion agrees that the denial of Feuget’s postconviction petition should be affirmed but rejects treating counsel’s failure to rebut the psychiatrist’s testimony as necessarily strategic or nondeficient. It would resolve the claim solely on prejudice, concluding that the other evidence supporting and opposing the involuntary-intoxication defense did not establish a reasonable probability of a different trial outcome. Hannah, C.J., joined the concurrence.