People v. Jackson

Good Law
167 Cal. App. 3d 829·1985 Cal. App. LEXIS 2029·213 Cal. Rptr. 521
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 2, 1985Crim. 11956California1,425 words

Opinion

Opinion

Puglia, J.

A jury convicted defendant of assault with intent to commit rape (Pen. Code, § 220), finding contemporaneous use of a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 12022, subd. (b)). Before sentencing, defendant discharged court-appointed trial counsel. Through retained counsel he moved for new trial on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. The crux of defendant’s complaint was the existence of an ongoing “dating” relationship between trial counsel and the prosecutor. According to defendant’s declaration in support of his motion for new trial, this relationship had not been disclosed to him. The record does not reveal when or in what manner the relationship ultimately became known to defendant. It is inferable, however, that defendant had no knowledge of it until after the conclusion of the trial.

Following an evidentiary hearing, the court denied the new trial motion. Imposition of sentence followed, On appeal, defendant renews his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. We shall reverse on the first ground.

I

The evidence at the new trial hearing establishes that defense counsel and the prosecutor began “dating”…

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.