In re Brown

Good Law
160 Cal. Rptr. 3d 822·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 648·218 Cal. App. 4th 1216·2013 WL 4157415
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 14, 2013B245677California4,971 words

Opinion

Opinion

Zelon, J.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Jamall Brown was charged with assault with a deadly weapon and vandalism. The information contained a prior strike allegation asserting that Brown had previously suffered a juvenile adjudication for robbery in violation of Penal Code section 211. After the jury convicted Brown of vandalism, he discussed the strike allegation with his attorney and agreed to admit the strike. As a result of the admission, the trial court doubled Brown’s prison term.

Following his conviction, Brown’s appellate counsel obtained the record of the juvenile proceedings and discovered that defendant’s sustained adjudication did not qualify as a strike. Brown filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus arguing that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to investigate the validity of the prior strike allegation. We previously issued an order to show cause and now grant the petition.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Trial Court Proceedings

On June 7, 2011, the District Attorney of the County of Los Angeles filed an information charging Jamall Brown with one count of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) and one count of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.