COM. V. YOUNG
Criminal: Challenges and collateral attack on conviction
2005-SC-000556-DG.pdf
PUBLISHED: REVERSING; MINTON
DATE RENDERED: 11/22/2006
Young’s RCr 11 .42 motion must fail because he does not allege any identifiable prejudice at trial that resulted from his counsel’s alleged error (e.g., that he would have struck a particular juror with the extra peremptory challenge) . Because it clearly does not meet Strickland ‘s requirement that a post-conviction petitioner make a showing of identifiable prejudice, Young’s RCr 11 .42 motion must be denied.
