If a defendant makes a motion for a continuance of trial on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, is it appropriate to appoint a new counsel to prepare the motion?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Garber, C078547 (Cal. App. 2015):

Citing People v. Bolin (1998) 18 Cal.4th 297 at page 346, defendant points us to the obvious, that if a defendant asks the trial court to appoint new counsel to prepare a motion for new trial on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, the court should hold a hearing and it may, in its discretion, appoint new counsel for defendant. But that request was not made in this case. Here, the new trial motion raised the claim of newly discovered evidence and did not assert that prior defense counsel lacked diligence in discovering it. The oral motion for a continuance requested time to investigate an entirely new and different claim of additional evidence, raised for the first time at the hearing by the defendant himself, accompanied by an assertion that his prior (not current) attorney "didn't listen to [him]" about it. The trial court did not err in declining to inquire further about this new claim, and certainly did not err in failing to sua sponte appoint a

Page 9

Other Questions


When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a motion for a new trial alleging inadequacy of counsel, does the court have to appoint a new counsel? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant obtain a new trial on the grounds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion to deny the motion on the same grounds as the previous motion? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant has appointed a new attorney to investigate a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, is the proper procedure to substitute a new appointed attorney for all purposes? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant deprived of his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel when a trial court denies his motion to substitute one appointed counsel for another? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial on ineffective assistance of counsel fail to address the issue of ineffective assistance? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant have any grounds to claim ineffective assistance of counsel as a result of his trial counsel's failure to object to the prosecutor's statements? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for denying a motion for a new trial on the grounds that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion under the first two grounds? (California, United States of America)
Is ineffective assistance of counsel ineffective on the grounds that the trial attorney failed to object to the insufficiency of admonitions? (California, United States of America)
If defendant fails to raise his statute of limitations argument in the trial, can he continue to do so on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.