The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Murolo, 902 F.2d 41 (9th Cir. 1989):
Until this appeal, Murolo did not raise the claim that he would have chosen to go to trial. He alleged no facts in his habeas petition that would support such a claim. The error he did allege does not support his contention, because even a single potential sentence of 25 years to life poses much greater exposure than the five-year sentence he received under the plea arrangement. Thus, Murolo's petition did not show a reasonable probability that he would have behaved differently in the absence of counsel's mistake. See Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 58-60 (1985).
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.