P. v. Poole
Defendant appeals his convictions on one count of possession for sale of cocaine and one count of transportation of a controlled substance resulting from a routine traffic stop. Prior to trial the court ruled evidence of defendant’s status on parole and his past gang involvement, which police discovered during the traffic stop, would not be admissible at trial. Instead, the parties stipulated the police had probable cause to detain and place defendant in handcuffs after police stopped him. However, during his direct examination defendant testified at some length concerning the nature of his interactions with police during the traffic stop and as a result the court concluded defendant “opened the door” to evidence concerning defendant’s parole status and prior gang involvement. On appeal, defendant argues his counsel was ineffective during Poole’s direct examination, because he elicited responses from Poole which “opened the door” to the otherwise inadmissible gang and criminal history evidence. Court did not agree. As court explained, defendant failed to demonstrate his counsel was deficient or that his counsel’s performance resulted in prejudice. Court affirmed.
Comments on P. v. Poole