Daniel Pedraza, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Pedraza’s postconviction petition, holding that he failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the investigation, mitigation evidence, plea agreement, jury voir dire, alleged coercion, or mitigation-stage questioning. The court emphasized that his allegations were either procedurally unsupported, conclusory, or failed to show a reasonable probability that he would have rejected the guilty plea or received a different sentence. The court also reaffirmed that cumulative-error claims are not cognizable in this postconviction proceeding.