Bucci v. United States, 09-2493 (2011)
Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Number: 09-2493
Visitors: 30
Filed: Nov. 23, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: One page 26, lines 18 through 23, replace These differences, suggest that, in complete closure situations, counsels failure to, object presumptively is an unsound trial strategy, whereas in, partial closure situations, no such presumption is appropriate.
United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit Nos. 09-2468; 09-2493 ANTHONY BUCCI, Petitioner, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent, Appellee. ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on October 13, 2011, is amended as follows: One page 26, lines 18 through 23, replace "These differences suggest that, in complete closure situations, counsel’s failure to object presumptively is an unsound trial strategy, whereas in partial closure situations, no such presumption is appropriate. We consider the question of ineffective assistance under the particular facts of this case, free of any presumption." with "These differences suggest that, in complete closure situations, counsel’s failure to object may in general be an unsound trial strategy, whereas in partial closure situations, no such assumption is appropriate. We consider the question of ineffective assistance under the particular facts of this case, under the usual Strickland presumption of competency."
Source: CourtListener
