People v. Myles

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of robbery. Defense and prosecution presented competing versions of events at trial. Defendant contended that the situation was merely a misunderstanding. Defendant made a substantial showing that trial counsel's failure to investigate alleged victim, and failure to cross-examine her on her background, was ineffective assistance. Victim's credibility was critical to the State's case, and evidence as to her pending fraud and bribery charges would reasonably tend to show that her testimony might be influenced by interest bias, or a motive to testify falsely. (ELLIS and BURKE, concurring.)