Whether the Kentucky Court of Appeals properly applied the Strickland prejudice prong when it held that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to investigate and present witness testimony at trial, but that Clack was not prejudiced by this deficient performance of counsel

QUESTION PRESENTED Clack’s trial counsel failed to investigate and present testimony of witness Brandon Clack at his criminal trial, despite his client requesting that he do so. The victim stated that Brandon Clack was present at the time of some of the alleged criminal conduct At a state post-conviction hearing, new counsel presented testimony from Brandon who stated he had never witnessed any criminal conduct between Clack and the victim. The trial court found that trial counsel for Clack was ineffective for failing to investigate and present the witness, but that Clack was not prejudiced because the jury returned a unanimous verdict. The Kentucky Court of Appeals denied relief, again finding that trial counsel was ineffective, but that Clack was not prejudiced. This result presents the following question: Whether the Kentucky Court of Appeals properly applied the Strickland prejudice prong when it held that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to investigate and present witness testimony at trial, but that Clack was not prejudiced by this deficient performance of counsel. i