Cited by

To establish an abuse of discretion, Tupper must show the superior court erred or “fail[ed] to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

DISCUSSION ¶7 We review the dismissal of a petition for post-conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

(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)).

¶2 We review the superior court’s ruling on a petition for post- conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

An abuse of discretion occurs when “the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

DISCUSSION ¶4 We review the superior court’s denial of a PCR petition “for an abuse of discretion, which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” 2 ¶ 6 (2021).

The court abuses its discretion “if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” 2 ¶ 6 (2021).

DISCUSSION ¶4 We review the superior court’s denial of a PCR petition “for an abuse of discretion, which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

¶ 15 (2021) (“Although an affidavit may not always be required to establish that counsel’s performance did not meet prevailing professional standards, a defendant must do more than disagree with, or posit alternatives to, counsel’s decisions to overcome the presumption of proper action.” (cleaned up) (quoting wi

STATE v. BUTTON Decision of the Court DISCUSSION ¶4 We review the summary dismissal of a petition for post- conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

DISCUSSION ¶6 We review the dismissal of a petition for post-conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

A court’s analysis of counsel’s strategy is “highly deferential,” and a “fair assessment of attorney performance requires that every effort be made to eliminate the distorting effects of hindsight.” ¶ 11 (2021) (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689).

We review for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

DISCUSSION ¶5 We review the dismissal of a petition for post-conviction relief for an abuse of discretion, “which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

A PCR claim “is subject to summary dismissal ‘[i]f the alleged facts would not have probably changed the verdict or sentence.’” ¶ 9 (2021) ( ¶ 11 (2016)).

P. 33.4(b)(3)(D) (“The court must excuse an untimely notice requesting post-conviction relief filed under [Rule 33.1(a)] if the defendant adequately explains why the failure to timely file a notice was not the defendant’s fault.”); ¶ 37 (2021) (Rule 32.4(b)(3)(D)’s exception overrides the normal filing time limits.).

DISCUSSION ¶8 We review the superior court’s denial of post-conviction relief “for an abuse of discretion, which occurs if the court makes an error of law or fails to adequately investigate the facts necessary to support its decision.” ¶ 6 (2021).

rather than self-defense”); ¶ 12 (2021) (“[M]atters of trial strategy and tactics are committed to defense counsel’s judgment and generally cannot serve as the basis for an IAC claim.”) (cleaned up); (“Defense counsel’s determinations of trial strategy, even if later proven unsuccessful, are not inef