McElvaney v. Pollard

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his Wisc. conviction for sexual assault of child on ground that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge time period for alleged assault set forth in charging documents, which, according to defendant, prevented him from preparing alibi defense. State Appellate Court rejected defendant’s claim on ground that defendant had failed to allege any facts showing that he would have been able to provide alibi defense had trial counsel pursued motion seeking more specific date-range for alleged sexual assault. Moreover, defendant failed to show that State Appellate Court’s decision was unreasonable application of Strickland’s requirement that defendant be able to show that trial counsel’s conduct was prejudicial to his case.