(1) Defendant received ineffective assistance when counsel failed to object to the PSI’s incorrect labeling of the class A misdemeanor charge as “aggravated.” There is an appreciable risk that the Board could draw an inaccurate conclusion about the nature of the offense Defendant admitted.
(2) Sentencing counsel did not render ineffective assistance by failing to more explicitly argue that Defendant be given probation rather than prison.
(3) Defendant’s rule 23B motion is denied because trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance by failing to discuss certain trial strategy with Defendant.
(4) Defendant’s rule 23B motion is also denied because trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance by not attempting to supplement the factual recitation contained in the PSI.