Loop v. Class

*194SABERS, Justice

(dissenting).

[¶29] Defense counsel committed ineffective assistance of counsel by asking Loop, “Did you have any intent to touch a ten-year-old girl to sexually gratify yourself?” Either way Loop answered, the door was opened and a conviction was certain.

[¶ 30] If Loop answered yes, he admitted the crime.

[¶ 31] If Loop answered no, the door was open for the State to show that one of Loop’s prior felony convictions involved sex with a minor.

[¶ 32] What makes matters worse is the fact that Loop had already answered that he did not sexually molest A.B. on Halloween. There was nothing to’ gain and everything to lose by asking the sexual gratification question.

[¶33] How the habeas court found trial counsel’s questioning was “sound trial strategy” is beyond me. We should reverse and remand for a fair trial based on a clear case of ineffective assistance of counsel. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); See Lee v. Solem, 405 N.W.2d 56, 59 (S.D.1987) (Sabers, J., dissenting).