What is the test for finding that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as a "counsel" under the Sixth Amendment?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Baeza-Pacheco, A153096 (Cal. App. 2018):
counsel "made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the 'counsel' guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment"; and (2) there is a "reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different." (Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 669, 687-688, 694.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
Other Questions
Is a defendant's ineffectual request for counsel in a Sixth Amendment context coincidentally invoked his Fifth Amendment right to have counsel present at any interrogation? (California, United States of America)
If counsel discovered that the burglary had been reduced to a misdemeanor, and lodged an objection below, would counsel have discovered that counsel had discovered that Counsel had discovered it was a misdemeanor? (California, United States of America)
Can the prosecution impeach a testifying defendant with statements obtained from his own counsel in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel? (California, United States of America)
In re-examining the findings of the Court of Appeal's error review, what are the consequences of the error where the error is cumulative? (California, United States of America)
When the error is that the error was not intentional, does the error result in the error not being corrected? (California, United States of America)
If a general plan amendment is a legislative function, does there need to be a finding to amend it? (California, United States of America)
Is there any error or violation of Sixth Amendment rights from the trial court's refusal to allow counsel's argument? (California, United States of America)
Does a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel include a right to loyal assistance? (California, United States of America)
Does Section 170.6, subdivision (2) of the Peremptory Challenge Act require counsel to disclose the identity of the assigned judge to counsel before counsel for the moving party learns that the assigning judge has been identified? (California, United States of America)
Is it sufficient for the jury to consider the error in finding that the jury considered evidence from which it could have come to a verdict without reliance on reliance on the error? (California, United States of America)
