Case Details
- Judge(s)
- Froelich
- Status
- Published
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal of trial court judgment affirmed
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Outcome
Appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that defendant's attorney provided reasonable strategic advice to plead guilty to aggravated vehicular homicide and that defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered the plea.
Excerpt
Defendant did not demonstrate that his attorney engaged in conduct that precluded him from knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entering his guilty plea to aggravated vehicular homicide. To the contrary, the record supports a determination that counsel's advice to plead guilty to the charged offense constituted a reasonable strategy. Judgment affirmed.
Similar Rulings
Criminal law—Ineffective assistance of counsel—When defense counsel fails to request that the trial court waive court costs on behalf of a defendant who has previously been found to be indigent, a determination of prejudice in an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel analysis depends on whether the facts and circumstances presented by the defendant establish that there is a reasonable probability that the trial court would have granted the request to waive court costs had one been made—Court of appeals' judgment reversed and cause remanded.
ASSAAD, 23 I&N Dec. 553 (BIA 2003) ID 3487 (PDF) (1) Case law of the United States Supreme Court holding, in the context of criminal proceedings, that there can be no deprivation of effective assistance of counsel where there is no constitutional right to counsel does not require withdrawal from Matter of Lozada, 19 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), affd, 857 F.2d 10 (1st Cir. 1988), finding a right to assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in immigration proceedings, where the United States Courts of Appeals have recognized that a respondent has a Fifth Amendment due process right to a fair immigration hearing, which may be denied if counsel prevents the respondent from meaningfully presenting his or her case. (2) The respondent did not establish that his former counsels failure to file a timely appeal constituted sufficient prejudice to warrant consideration of his late appeal on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.