Absent the presumption of competence, [*62] this Court concludes that counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel in the uninformed strategic decision not to call Dr. Cooke as a witness in the penalty phase of the trial. Simply put, counsels' failure to request Dr. Greenfield's report and to make reasonable investigations rendered counsels' performance deficient because it resulted in the uninformed decision to exclude N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3(c)(5)(a), mitigating evidence.Saldano v. Roach, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 5424 (5th Cir 3/23/2004) Where the district court granted relief and the respondent does not appeal in a habeas action, the District Attorney's office who prosecuted the matter may not intervene.Furthermore, since the Attorney General is properly representing the State in this case, Texas law does not permit the District Attorney to assume representation of the State as well. Under Texas law, "either the Attorney General or a county or district attorney may represent the State in a particular situation, but these are the only choices, whichever official represents the State exercises exclusive authority and if services of other lawyers are utilized, they must be 'in subordination' to his authority."