2009-M-111        Pierre Lamont Leake, petitioner, Appellant, vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent.

On September 22, 2003, a jury found appellant Pierre Lamont Leake guilty of first-degree premeditated murder and he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of release.

On direct appeal in 2005, we affirmed Leake’s conviction and sentence. 

Subsequently, Leake filed a pro se post-conviction petition that was summarily denied.  On appeal, we affirmed the post-conviction court’s decision in part, but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Leak’s appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to bring the ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim on direct appeal.  After an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief and Leake appealed.  We affirm. 

First, to satisfy the prejudice prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim involving a rejected plea agreement, the appellant must establish that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional error, the appellant would have accepted the plea agreement.

Second, the post-conviction court did not abuse its discretion in finding that there was no reasonable probability that appellant would have accepted the plea agreement, and therefore appellant failed to establish ineffective assistance of trial counsel.  As a result, the court did not err in denying appellant’s petition for post-conviction relief.

               Dietzen (Magnuson, Page, Paul Anderson, Meyer, Barry Anderson, and Gildea)    

[MURDER]