Is there any case law where a defendant's trial counsel was incompetent for not arguing at trial that the prosecutor's decision to seek the death penalty was based on a lack of guidelines in the district attorney's office?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from In re Seaton, 17 Cal.Rptr.3d 633, 34 Cal.4th 193, 95 P.3d 896 (Cal. 2004):
Petitioner accuses his trial counsel of incompetence for not arguing at trial that the prosecutor's decision to seek the death penalty was based on a lack of guidelines in the district attorney's office. As we explained earlier (see ante, 17 Cal. Rptr.3d pp. 637-638, 95 P.3d pp. 899-900), claims that trial counsel was incompetent are not procedurally barred by a petitioner's failure to raise them, so petitioner may now raise this claim. Nevertheless, it lacks merit. No statute or constitutional provision requires a district attorney to have guidelines on when to seek the death penalty. (See generally People v. Lucas, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 477, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 525, 907 P.2d 373.) Thus, had defense counsel raised at trial the issue of guidelines, the trial court likely would have denied the motion.
[17 Cal.Rptr.3d 641]
Hence, counsel cannot be faulted for not making this argument.[17 Cal.Rptr.3d 641]
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
