What is the effect of having the same assistant public defender representing the same defendant at the same time?

Each of the three defendants presents essentially the same contention on appeal, to wit: that representation of all three by the same assistant public defender constituted a deprivation of the right to effective counsel. As will be shown herein, that contention is meritorious. However, although representation of all three defendants by the same attorney was error, it was not prejudicial even though we apply the very strict rule of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed.2d 705. We will affirm the judgments against all defendants.