California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Jones, In re, 13 Cal.4th 552, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 52 (Cal. 1996):
Measured against these standards, defense counsel's pro forma investigation prior to trial clearly was inadequate for a complicated capital trial. As we have made clear in our past decisions, the constitutional right to be represented by counsel embodies a right to be represented by a "diligent, conscientious advocate." (People v. Pope, supra, 23 Cal.3d at p. 424, 152 Cal.Rptr. 732, 590 P.2d 859.) Defense counsel's investigation prior to trial did not meet this standard. Even if defense counsel believed the best trial strategy was to "sandbag" the prosecution with regard to the handgun evidence, we believe that reasonably competent counsel would have investigated thoroughly all the evidence pertaining to petitioner's prior involvement with these weapons, to ensure that the benefits of such a trial strategy were likely to outweigh the disadvantages of that course, and to be prepared at trial to limit the amount of irrelevant, prejudicial evidence that was admitted as a result of the planned trial strategy. Defense counsel failed to perform these tasks. For this reason, we agree with petitioner's contention that defense counsel's pretrial investigation and preparation for trial were inadequate.
b. The witness not located
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.