diff --git a/crypto/merkle/doc.go b/crypto/merkle/doc.go
index 865c302..fe50b34 100644
--- a/crypto/merkle/doc.go
+++ b/crypto/merkle/doc.go
@@ -12,20 +12,19 @@ second pre-image attacks. Hence, use this library with caution.
 Otherwise you might run into similar issues as, e.g., in early Bitcoin:
 https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=102395
 
-                        *
-                       / \
-                     /     \
-                   /         \
-                 /             \
-                *               *
-               / \             / \
-              /   \           /   \
-             /     \         /     \
-            *       *       *       h6
-           / \     / \     / \
-          h0  h1  h2  h3  h4  h5
+	              *
+	             / \
+	           /     \
+	         /         \
+	       /             \
+	      *               *
+	     / \             / \
+	    /   \           /   \
+	   /     \         /     \
+	  *       *       *       h6
+	 / \     / \     / \
+	h0  h1  h2  h3  h4  h5
 
 TODO(ismail): add 2nd pre-image protection or clarify further on how we use this and why this secure.
-
 */
 package merkle
diff --git a/crypto/merkle/proof_value.go b/crypto/merkle/proof_value.go
index ab77621..842dc82 100644
--- a/crypto/merkle/proof_value.go
+++ b/crypto/merkle/proof_value.go
@@ -85,8 +85,8 @@ func (op ValueOp) Run(args [][]byte) ([][]byte, error) {
 
 	bz := new(bytes.Buffer)
 	// Wrap <op.Key, vhash> to hash the KVPair.
-	encodeByteSlice(bz, op.key) // nolint: errcheck // does not error
-	encodeByteSlice(bz, vhash)  // nolint: errcheck // does not error
+	encodeByteSlice(bz, op.key) //nolint: errcheck // does not error
+	encodeByteSlice(bz, vhash)  //nolint: errcheck // does not error
 	kvhash := leafHash(bz.Bytes())
 
 	if !bytes.Equal(kvhash, op.Proof.LeafHash) {
diff --git a/crypto/merkle/tree.go b/crypto/merkle/tree.go
index 466c434..089c2f8 100644
--- a/crypto/merkle/tree.go
+++ b/crypto/merkle/tree.go
@@ -47,10 +47,10 @@ func HashFromByteSlices(items [][]byte) []byte {
 //
 // These preliminary results suggest:
 //
-// 1. The performance of the HashFromByteSlice is pretty good
-// 2. Go has low overhead for recursive functions
-// 3. The performance of the HashFromByteSlice routine is dominated
-//    by the actual hashing of data
+//  1. The performance of the HashFromByteSlice is pretty good
+//  2. Go has low overhead for recursive functions
+//  3. The performance of the HashFromByteSlice routine is dominated
+//     by the actual hashing of data
 //
 // Although this work is in no way exhaustive, point #3 suggests that
 // optimization of this routine would need to take an alternative