California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Sunkett, A130086 (Cal. App. 2012):
In light of all of the circumstances, particularly counsel's decision, based on experience, to focus on vigorous cross-examination, as well as on closing argument, to question the eyewitness identifications of appellant (see pt. I.B., ante), we cannot say that counsel's initial decision not to call an identification expert to testify establishes incompetence. (See Strickland, supra, 466 U.S. at p. 688; see also People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297, 334 ["Whether to call certain witnesses is . . . a matter of trial tactics, unless the decision results from unreasonable failure to investigate"].)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.