United States v. David Leonti

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 4379·326 F.3d 1111·2003 WL 1923504·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3419·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 7727
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 24, 200301-17113California4,768 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hawkins, J.

We confront an issue of first impression in this circuit: whether a viable ineffective assistance of counsel claim can arise in the sentencing context; specifically, whether failing to effectively assist a defendant awaiting sentencing in his willing efforts to provide cooperation to an interested government can constitute a Sixth Amendment violation. Concluding that the pre sentencing cooperation period is a critical stage of the criminal process and that obtaining a substantial assistance motion from the government represents a particularly critical point in that process, we reverse the district court’s refusal to hold an evidentiary hearing on allegations which, if proven true, would make out such a claim.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The nature of the district court dismissal leaves us a record consisting largely of Leonti’s allegations which, for the purpose of our review, unless palpably incredible or patently frivolous, must be taken as true. United States v. Schaflander, 743 F.2d 714, 717 (9th Cir.1984).

In late 1995, the DEA acquired information from a cooperating source that Leonti was the head of a group of individuals in San Jose, California who were sending…

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.