Cited by

("Disagreements as to trial strategy or errors in trial will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis.").

See Pandeli, 242 Ariz. at 182 ¶ 15 (“Disagreements as to trial strategy or errors in trial will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis.” ()); (finding no ineffective assistance where counsel’s “failure to offer any instructions may have been a decision on his part that his client was well served by the court’s [other] instructions.”).

ion in finding that Hardy’s “claims regarding flaws in trial counsel’s representation are tactical decisions solely within the purview of trial counsel.” See Pandeli, 242 Ariz. at 182 ¶ 15 (“Disagreements as to trial strategy or errors in trial will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis.” ()).

See Strickland, 466 U.S. at 690–91 (“[S]trategic choices made after less than complete investigation are reasonable precisely to the extent that reasonable professional judgments support the limitations on investigation.”); (“Proof of ineffectiveness must be a demonstrable reality rather than a matter of speculation.”)(citations omitted).

See, (“Either indictment by a grand jury or information after a preliminary hearing is a constitutionally proper method of bringing an accused felon to trial.”); n.2 (App. 1997) (“An information must be preceded by the filing of a complaint and a finding of probable cause.”); see

(citations omitted); ¶ 15 (2021) (“A defendant must do more than disagree with, or posit alternatives to, counsel’s decisions to overcome the presumption of proper action.” (cleaned up)).

consecutive sentences” for an abuse of discretion, see also § 13-711(A).

(“Proof of ineffectiveness must be a demonstrable reality rather than a matter of speculation.”).

disapproved of on other grounds, ¶ 25 (2001); 461 (1985) (analyzing attorney’s “failure to argue for petitioner’s alleged intoxication” as trial strategy); (attorney’s decision “as to what witnesses should be called .

(“Either indictment by a grand jury or information after a preliminary hearing is a constitutionally proper method of bringing an accused felon to trial.”).

(disagreement over trial strategy will not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel if the conduct has a reasoned basis).

State v. Meeker , , 260, , 915 (1984).

4 STATE v. BEASLEY Decision of the Court have some reasoned basis.”

will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis.”

“Disagreements as to trial strategy or errors in trial will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis.”

("Either indictment by a grand jury or information after a preliminary hearing is a constitutionally proper method of bringing an accused felon to trial.").

Baker’s tactical choices did not affect his competency, just as “[d]isagreements as to trial strategy or errors in trial will not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis.”

(proof of counsel’s ineffectiveness “must be a demonstrable reality rather than a matter of *103 speculation”).

See Cartwright, 155 Ariz. at 311, 746 P.2d at 481 (witness not involved in pretrial identification procedure or Dessureault hearing could nonetheless identify defendant for first time at trial); (defendant’s sitting at defense table with sign that said “defense” not unduly suggestive); Myers, 117 Ariz. at 84, 570 P.2d at 1257 (“The law does not preclude a victim from identifying his attacker, presented alone, at a later time just because the victim could not identify the att

(“disagreements as to trial strategy or errors in trial tactics will not support an effectiveness claim so long as the challenged conduct could have some reasoned basis”); In re T.M.F., 573 A.2d at 1045 (“Trial counsel should be excused for not doing a useless act and wasting the time o