Case Law Middleton v. State

Middleton v. State

Document Cited Authorities (3) Cited in (23) Related

Attorneys for Appellant : Jeffrey A. Baldwin, Tyler D. Helmond, Voyles, Zahn, & Paul, Indianapolis, IN

Attorneys for Appellee : Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General of Indiana, Jesse R. Drum, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana

On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 32A01-1603-PC-592

Per Curiam.

Corey Middleton filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging several claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The post-conviction court denied Middleton's petition, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Middleton v. State , 64 N.E.3d 895 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), reh'g denied . In so doing, the court determined Middleton's counsel performed deficiently as to one of Middleton's claims. Id. at 903. But the court ultimately rejected that claim, finding Middleton had "not established that but for counsel's error, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Id. at 902. Middleton seeks transfer, contending, among other things, that the Court of Appeals applied the incorrect standard in making this assessment.

We agree with our colleagues' ultimate resolution of Middleton's claims. We note, however, that to demonstrate prejudice from counsel's deficient performance, a petitioner need only show "a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (emphasis added). "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome." Id. See, e.g. , Campbell v. State , 19 N.E.3d 271, 274 (Ind. 2014) ; Wilkes v. State , 984 N.E.2d 1236, 1241 (Ind. 2013) (quoting Strickland ).

Accordingly, we grant transfer and summarily affirm the Court of Appeals opinion pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 58(A), with the exception of its misstatement of Strickland 's prejudice standard.

All Justices concur.

5 cases
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2021
Absher v. State
"...probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Middleton v. State , 72 N.E.3d 891, 891 (Ind. 2017) (emphasis and citation omitted). "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outco..."
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2022
Benson v. State
"... ... shoot at a chasing officer. Therefore, we cannot reasonably ... say the ... jury's verdict would have been different had Attorney ... Ellis performed any of the actions Benson faults him for not ... taking. See Middleton v. State , 72 N.E.3d 891, 892 ... (Ind. 2017) (holding no reasonable probability that but for ... trial counsel's deficient performance the jury would have ... rendered a different verdict) ...          B ... Appellate Counsel's Alleged Ineffectiveness ... "
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2021
Truex v. State
"...probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Middleton v. State , 72 N.E.3d 891, 891 (Ind. 2017) (citation omitted). A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. Id. at 891..."
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2022
Henderson v. State
"... ... N.E.3d at 682. To demonstrate prejudice from counsel's ... deficient performance, a petitioner need only show "a ... reasonable probability that, but for counsel's ... unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would ... have been different." Middleton v. State , 72 ... N.E.3d 891, 891 (Ind. 2017) (emphasis and citation omitted) ... "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to ... undermine confidence in the outcome." Id ... at ... 891-92. "Although the performance prong and the ... prejudice prong are ... "
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2024
Ricker v. State
"...2017) (emphasis and citation omitted). "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome." Id. at 891-92. "Although the performance prong and the prejudice prong are separate inquiries, failure to satisfy either prong will cause the claim to fail."..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2021
Absher v. State
"...probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Middleton v. State , 72 N.E.3d 891, 891 (Ind. 2017) (emphasis and citation omitted). "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outco..."
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2022
Benson v. State
"... ... shoot at a chasing officer. Therefore, we cannot reasonably ... say the ... jury's verdict would have been different had Attorney ... Ellis performed any of the actions Benson faults him for not ... taking. See Middleton v. State , 72 N.E.3d 891, 892 ... (Ind. 2017) (holding no reasonable probability that but for ... trial counsel's deficient performance the jury would have ... rendered a different verdict) ...          B ... Appellate Counsel's Alleged Ineffectiveness ... "
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2021
Truex v. State
"...probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." Middleton v. State , 72 N.E.3d 891, 891 (Ind. 2017) (citation omitted). A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. Id. at 891..."
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2022
Henderson v. State
"... ... N.E.3d at 682. To demonstrate prejudice from counsel's ... deficient performance, a petitioner need only show "a ... reasonable probability that, but for counsel's ... unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would ... have been different." Middleton v. State , 72 ... N.E.3d 891, 891 (Ind. 2017) (emphasis and citation omitted) ... "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to ... undermine confidence in the outcome." Id ... at ... 891-92. "Although the performance prong and the ... prejudice prong are ... "
Document | Indiana Appellate Court – 2024
Ricker v. State
"...2017) (emphasis and citation omitted). "A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome." Id. at 891-92. "Although the performance prong and the prejudice prong are separate inquiries, failure to satisfy either prong will cause the claim to fail."..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex