Summary
holding that defense counsel's failure to comply with Administrative Order 2004- 6, Minimum Standards for Indigent Criminal Appellate Defense Services amounted to ineffective assistance
Summary of this case from People v. MarshallOpinion
Docket No. 148056. COA No. 316467.
11-19-2014
PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. David ROARK, Defendant–Appellant.
Order
By order of February 28, 2014, the defendant's previously appointed appellate counsel was directed to file a supplemental brief. On order of the Court, the brief having been received, the application for leave to appeal the October 25, 2013 order of the Court of Appeals is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the defendant's May 29, 2013 delayed application for leave to appeal as on leave granted. Because the defendant waited more than five months before filing an untimely request for the appointment of appellate counsel, the defendant is not entitled to review under the standard applicable to direct appeals. However, the defendant's previously appointed appellate attorney failed to comply with Administrative Order 2004–6, Minimum Standards for Indigent Criminal Appellate Defense Services, Standard 5. Counsel did not seek to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Therefore costs are imposed against the attorney, only, in the amount of $1,000 to be paid to the Clerk of this Court.
We do not retain jurisdiction.