Parris v. Hill

Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying him post-conviction relief. He asserts that the post-conviction court erred in rejecting his claim that appellate counsel was inadequate for failing to assign error to the criminal trial courts amendment of the underlying judgment to add 12 months to petitioners sentence. Petitioner also argues that the post-conviction court erred in various regards in denying his claim that he received inadequate assistance from trial counsel in the underlying criminal proceeding; we reject petitioners claims concerning the adequacy of trial counsel without discussion. The state concedes that petitioner received inadequate assistance of appellate counsel. As explained below, we conclude that that concession is well founded. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.