AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant was convicted following a jury trial for two counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor (second degree) (under 13) (unclothed). The appeal challenges the effectiveness of counsel for not filing a motion to sever the counts and questions the credibility of witness testimony, asserting that the witnesses had discussed the allegations with each other prior to trial (para 1).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that it was ineffective assistance for counsel not to file a motion to sever the counts and contended that the testimony of some witnesses was not credible because the witnesses had discussed the allegations with each other prior to trial, rendering the evidence insufficient (para 2).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: The specific arguments of the Plaintiff-Appellee are not detailed in the provided text, but it can be inferred that the Plaintiff-Appellee opposed the Defendant-Appellant's arguments and supported the trial court's decisions (para 1).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant-Appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failure to file a motion to sever the counts.
• Whether the testimony of some witnesses was not credible, based on the assertion that the witnesses had discussed the allegations with each other prior to trial, and whether the evidence was thus insufficient to support the convictions.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions of the Defendant-Appellant for two counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor (second degree) (under 13) (unclothed) (para 5).

Reasons

• Per J. Miles Hanisee, with Jennifer L. Attrep and Megan P. Duffy, Judges, concurring:
  The Court found that most evidence likely would have been cross-admissible in the event of a severance, suggesting that any motion to sever would have been unsuccessful. Therefore, the Defendant-Appellant did not demonstrate a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel (para 2).
  The Court reiterated that it does not reweigh evidence or assess witnesses’ credibility on appeal. It remained unpersuaded by the Defendant-Appellant's claim that the fact witnesses discussed the allegations amongst themselves before testifying rendered their testimony incredible and insufficient to support a conviction. The Court referenced multiple precedents to support its position that it is the role of the fact-finder to resolve conflicts in testimony and determine the weight and credibility of the evidence (paras 3-4).