In Re Alcox

People v. Alcox

Good Law
137 Cal. App. 4th 657·40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 491
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 2006B185265California5,034 words

Opinion

Opinion

Yegan, J.

This case serves as a textbook example of a court impermissibly “second-guessing” criminal defense counsel’s tactical decisions in derogation of United States and California Supreme Court precedent. We reverse and conclude, on the merits, that Joel Alcox (defendant) received the effective assistance of counsel at his murder trial almost 20 years ago.

The People appeal from a habeas corpus order setting aside a 1987 felony murder conviction. (Pen. Code, § 1506.) Defendant was sentenced to 26 years to life after a jury convicted him of first degree murder (§§ 187, 189), robbery (§ 211), and first degree burglary (§§ 459, 460) with a firearm enhancement (§ 12022, subd. (a)). The Santa Barbara County Superior Court granted habeas corpus relief based on “ineffectiveness of trial counsel in failing to advance plausible arguments for innocence, and failing to investigate evidence of alibi.”

The 1987 Conviction

On the evening of February 16, 1986, Thakorbhai Patel was shot and killed at the Lompoc Motel. Patel owned the motel and had living quarters adjacent to the motel office. The police found the lift-up portion of the office counter tilted up and the money drawer open. A…

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.