Stephenson v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Stephenson’s postconviction-relief motion, concluding that trial counsel was not ineffective for advising him not to testify. Counsel reasonably balanced the potential value of Stephenson’s self-defense testimony against damaging cross-examination, disclosure of his criminal history, and the possible loss of a lesser-included-offense verdict, and Stephenson ultimately chose not to testify after consultation. The Court also determined that the appeal was wholly without merit and that appointed counsel had conscientiously reviewed the record and law.