Robert Holland v. State of Arkansas

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Robert Holland’s Rule 37.5 petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel in his capital-murder case. It held that counsel’s decisions concerning restraints, jury selection, mitigation evidence, nonstatutory mitigators, and closing argument were either reasonable strategic choices, supported by the record, or not shown to have caused prejudice; the court also declined to review the sealed-petition issue because Holland failed to proffer the unredacted petition.