In Re Prescott

Good Law
149 Cal. App. 4th 243·57 Cal. Rptr. 3d 126
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 3, 2007D047936California4,413 words

Opinion

Opinion

Defendant Edward Prescott, by petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenges his criminal conviction on one count of corporal injury to a spouse, on the ground that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel during a critical stage of his criminal proceedings. Prescott contends that his right to the assistance of counsel was violated when, after Prescott indicated a desire to withdraw his guilty plea, his court-appointed counsel provided a report to the trial court in which he concluded that there existed no basis for Prescott to file a motion to withdraw the guilty plea, and revealed privileged communications between himself and Prescott.

We conclude that counsel violated Prescott's attorney-client privilege by revealing to the court and prosecutor the content of his conversations with Prescott. We further conclude that Prescott was effectively deprived of the assistance of counsel when his appointed counsel not only failed to advocate on Prescott's behalf, but advocated against Prescott's interests. Such complete deprivation of counsel is one of the rare circumstances in which prejudice to the defendant is presumed, and reversal is…

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.