What is the state attorney general's response to a petition brought by a plaintiff alleging incompetence in her defence?

We conclude the totality of Wilkinson's allegations raise a prima facie case of incompetence of trial counsel. (In re Cudjo (1999) 20 Cal.4th 673, 687, 85 Cal.Rptr.2d 436, 977 P.2d 66.) In his informal response, the Attorney General does not contend the petition is either procedurally barred or that, if proven, Wilkinson's allegations would not constitute prejudicial incompetence. The Attorney General argues only that Wilkinson has failed to include her trial counsel's declaration about any tactical reasons for his conduct, and failed to provide a complete record of the various offers she alleges the prosecution made. We issue an order to show cause, returnable before the trial court, which is to hold an evidentiary hearing and rule on the merits of Wilkinson's allegations. (People v. Mendoza-Tello (1997) 15 Cal.4th 264, 266-267, 62 Cal. Rptr.2d 437, 933 P.2d 1134.)