By: dmc-admin//August 6, 2001//
Harold Kuik appeals a judgment convicting him of four counts of delivering a controlled substance and one count of possession with intent to deliver. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion in which he alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel. First, Kuik argues that his counsel was constitutionally ineffective because counsel never subpoenaed Kuik’s son, Benjamin, to testify at trial. Kuik contends that Benjamin may have taken responsibility for the drugs found in their home or he may have invoked his Fifth Amendment rights, causing the jury to believe he was responsible. Second, he claims his attorney failed to adequately discuss the case with Kuik before trial, did not give Kuik the opportunity to listen to audiotapes of the drug transactions and did not provide Kuik with copies of the police reports.
Because we conclude that Kuik has established neither deficient performance nor prejudice, we affirm the judgment and order.
This opinion will not be published.
Dist III, Shawano County, Grover, J., Per Curiam
Attorneys:
For Appellant: John M. Carroll, Waterford; Daniel Borck, Waterford
For Respondent: Gary R. Bruno, Shawano; Eileen W. Pray, Madison