Cited by

Second, the defendant must show that “a reasonable probability exists that the outcome would have been different but for counsel’s errors.” 5 (quotation omitted).

Although structural errors typically require automatic reversal; the remedy for denying a defendant’s right to a public trial “should be appropriate to the violation, and a retrial is hot required if a remand will remedy the violation.” see Waller.v.

Prosecutors may present “all legitimate arguments on the evidence, to analyze and explain the evidence, and to present all proper inferences to be drawn therefrom,” Smith, d at 589, but it is “unprofessional conduct for the prosecutor intentionally to misstate the evidence or mislead the jury as to the inferences it may draw.” (quotations omitted).

“It is unprofessional conduct for the prosecutor intentionally to misstate the evidence or mislead the jury as to the inferences it may draw.” (

legitimate arguments on the evidence, to analyze and 8 explain the evidence, and to present all proper inferences to be drawn therefrom,” but it is “unprofessional conduct for the prosecutor intentionally to misstate the evidence or mislead the jury as to the inferences it may draw.” (citation omitted).

We have held that “[w]hat evidence to present to the jury, what witnesses to call, and whether to object are part of an attorney’s trial strategy which lie within the proper discretion of trial counsel and will generally not be reviewed later for competence.” see also Andersen, d at 10 (noting that the extent of trial counsel’s investigation is ordinarily considered trial strategy).

1 -37 (Minn. 2009), -15 (Minn. 2012), we limit our discussion of the facts to those directly related to this appeal.

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064 (1984)

(citing Strickland v. Washington, 446 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064 (1984)).