Is there any case law where a defendant's attorney failed to investigate, or call an expert to testify about the effect of his intoxication?

In this vein, the central intoxication case the district court cites, Miller v. Terhune , 510 F.Supp.2d 486 (E.D. Cal. 2007), is unavailing.²⁷ First, the ineffectiveness of the defendant's attorney in Terhune was not limited to a failure to investigateor to call an expert to testify aboutthe effect of the defendant's intoxication, but rather included a failure even to seek an intoxication instruction or pursue an intoxication-based defense in the first place. See id. at 491, 502. Here, the jury was instructed on intoxication and Simons argued the point in his summation, yet the jury still voted to convict. Second, in Miller , the expert that defense counsel could have called clearly opined that the defendant's

[857 F.3d 484]