People v. Manning 

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of possession of controlled substance with intent to deliver. During voir dire, defense counsel told venire that they would hear evidence that Defendant is a registered sex offender, and questioned venire about whether that status would affect their ability to be impartial. Defense counsel was not ineffective by failing to request striking for cause, or use peremptory challenge as to one potential juror who said that he could not be fair because of Defendant's sex offender status. The entire voir dire of the potential juror must be considered in context, as he gave other statements that he would be fair, so that his expression of bias was not unequivocal. Counsel's decisions during voir dire are a matter of trial strategy. (THOMAS and THEIS, concurring; KILBRIDE and KARMEIER, specially concurring; FREEMAN and BURKE, dissenting.)