What is the Attorney General's position on a referee's finding that a defense counsel's decision not to investigate the backgrounds of informants was constitutionally deficient?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Jackson, In re, 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 531, 3 Cal.4th 578, 835 P.2d 371 (Cal. 1992):

The Attorney General takes issue with each of the referee's findings related to this claim. First, the Attorney General maintains that defense counsel's decision not to undertake any investigation of the informants' backgrounds, while ultimately unsuccessful, was not constitutionally deficient. The Attorney General acknowledges that although courts generally are reluctant to second guess the tactical decisions of counsel, such decisions are not totally immune from scrutiny and may fall below a constitutionally [3 Cal.4th 604] minimal standard of competence. (See, e.g., People v. Frierson (1979) 25 Cal.3d 142, 166, 158 Cal.Rptr. 281, 599 P.2d 587.) He argues, however, that the referee erred in finding that counsel's action fell into the latter category.

Additionally, the Attorney General challenges the referee's conclusions on both points relating to the issue of prejudice.

Page 547

Other Questions


Does a prosecutor's comment that "any experienced defense attorney can twist a little, poke little, try to get you to buy something" constitute a personal attack on defense counsel's integrity? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General's failure to instruct the jury on a claim of right defense constitute ineffective assistance of counsel? (California, United States of America)
Does trial counsel shirk his constitutional responsibility to provide competent counsel by failing to ask the court to instruct on a bogus self-defense defense? (California, United States of America)
Does the delay in seeking juror information from the trial attorney's delay in obtaining the juror's information constitute inadequate assistance of counsel? (California, United States of America)
Is it generally improper for a prosecutor to accuse defense counsel of fabricating a defense, or to imply that counsel is free to deceive the jury? (California, United States of America)
Is a prosecutor's comment that defense counsel was seeking to "distract the jury from the evidence as an attack on counsel's integrity a fair response to defense counsel's remarks? (California, United States of America)
Does an of counsel attorney have a conflict of interest relationship with a law firm and the attorneys affiliated with it as of counsel? (California, United States of America)
When a prosecutor asks a defense counsel a question in voir dire about rape and sexual assault, is the defense counsel's failure to object to the questions? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General have the authority to rely solely on a confidential informant's personal information? (California, United States of America)
Does a prosecutor's comment that an experienced defense counsel will "twist and poke" at the prosecution's case constitute a personal attack on counsel's integrity? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.