Bentley v. State

Summary

The court affirmed Bentley’s convictions, holding that none of his three ineffective-assistance claims established deficient performance and prejudice. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the autopsy photograph because the proposed objections would have been meritless, and Bentley was not prejudiced by the admission of his prior convictions or by counsel’s fleeting reference to an earlier trial. The court also concluded that the assumed deficiencies did not cumulatively create a reasonable probability of a different result.