RACINE - An expert could have questioned whether the man Adrial White killed was lying on the ground when shot, but the jury never heard that testimony, because White's attorney did not hire an expert.

Attorney Robert D'Arruda was on the stand for several hours Thursday, as White's new attorney, prosecutors and the judge questioned him about his performance as White's trial counsel.

Thursday's hearing was at White's request for a new trial. After the hearing is complete, the judge will decide whether grounds exist to give White a new trial. White was found in guilty in November 2006 of first-degree intentional homicide and attempted first-degree intentional homicide for shooting at three men during an attempted theft, killing one and wounding another.

Attorney Mark Richards is handling White's appeal, which is largely based on claims that D'Arruda was ineffective. Much of the day's testimony focused on whether D'Arruda erred by not consulting with or hiring an independent forensic pathologist to rebut testimony by Waukesha County Medical Examiner Lynda Biedrzycki, who said Christopher "Eric" Carbajal was shot "almost execution-style."

Biedrzycki testified that Carbajal's fatal wound came from a bullet that entered his lower back and traveled slightly upward through his body, before exiting in such a manner as to cause a "shored" wound. That type of exit wound, she testified at trial, happens when the body is pressed against something solid, like the ground.

Richards has hired an expert, a former Milwaukee County medical examiner, who has given an opinion that the exit wound is not a shored wound, but irregular in shape because of a tumbling bullet. Dr. Jeffrey Jentzen is expected to testify Friday morning.

D'Arruda testified Thursday that he never asked White's family if they wanted to hire an expert.

Richards asked D'Arruda if he was aware of the medical examiner's opinion that Carbajal was lying face down on the pavement when he was shot. D'Arruda said that he was.

"Was that consistent or inconsistent with your theory of defense?" Richards asked.

"Inconsistent," D'Arruda said.

"Did you do any research yourself?"

"No, I didn't."

Instead of hiring an expert or submitting any medical research on shored wounds, D'Arruda relied on his client's testimony to refute Biedrzycki's statements.

When Richards asked D'Arruda if Jentzen's report would have been useful at trial, D'Arruda answered:

"There's no doubt about it. Absolutely. Essentially, the conclusion he has is that (Carbajal) did not have to be on the ground when he got shot. There's other ways the bullet could have had the shoring effect."

On cross-examination, Assistant District Attorney Maureen Martinez asked D'Arruda if he felt he had provided White with a good defense.

"You have a very unique and distinct style when you're in the courtroom," Martinez said.

"I try to know the facts backwards and forwards," D'Arruda said. "I like to ask rapid-fire questions of the witnesses. I like to be flamboyant to make my points. To be enthusiastic and get into the case."

She gave several examples, saying that D'Arruda threw himself on the floor several times, and faked a phone call from one of the victims in the case.

"Do you think the issues were tried fully or effectively?" Martinez asked.

"Yes, I do," D'Arruda answered. "Obviously there are things I should have done and could have done as pointed out by the defense. I gave it all I had. You can always second-guess yourself."

Judge Charles Constantine, who presided over the trial, took time to question D'Arruda as well. He asked D'Arruda if he read the appeals court opinion that reprimanded him for not hiring an expert in a vehicular homicide case. The opinion came out about six weeks before White's trial began.

"Did you read it before the trial?" Constantine asked.

"I probably did," D'Arruda said.

"Didn't anything about this decision strike a chord, make you say, 'Hmm, maybe an expert might be required?'"

"It should have," D'Arruda said. "It should have, Judge. That's the only time I've been found ineffective in all the trials I did."

Constantine continued:

"We can all second-guess," he said. "As a judge you get second-guessed. In fact, Mr. Richards' whole motion is second-guessing you and me. Having said that, in light of the significance of the state's expert, how do you feel you should go forward without an expert?"

"I suppose overconfidence," D'Arruda said. "That I could win without them. If I saw the letter written by Dr. Jentzen, I would have loved to have that. I didn't do that. I should have, but I didn't do that."

In closing, Richards asked D'Arruda a final time about his performance at trial.

"Looking back on it, if you had to try it over again, would you get a doctor?" Richards asked.

"Absolutely, yes," D'Arruda said.

"Do you believe by not having a doctor, your client's case was harmed?"

"Well, we didn't win," D'Arruda said.

Case background

The following information is taken from police and court records.

In the early morning hours of Jan. 18, 2006, three young men, ages 18 and 19, were trying to steal a speaker from a car in an alley between Blaine and Arthur avenues, just off 15th Street. A door on a nearby house opened, and Adrial White came out. He was shouting, swearing and opened fire on the three people he saw rummaging through his girlfriend's car.

Christopher "Eric" Carbajal died after he was shot in the back. The medical examiner who performed the autopsy called it an "almost execution-style shooting."

Enrico Serra Jr., was shot in the back of the neck; the bullet lodged in his jaw. He required surgery to remove the bullet. Phillip Jardina had a bullet pass through his three shirts, but was not injured.

At trial, White claimed self-defense. A jury convicted him of first-degree intentional homicide and attempted first-degree intentional homicide, for killing Carbajal and wounding Serra.