§Why CasetextPricing

The People, Respondent,v.Josue Deliser, Appellant.

Brief

45 Cited authorities

  1. Strickland v. Washington

    466 U.S. 668 (1984)   Cited 134,775 times   173 Legal Analyses
    Holding that prejudice for IAC claims requires showing "that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different"

  2. Anders v. California

    386 U.S. 738 (1967)   Cited 64,589 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court-appointed appellate counsel is not required to prosecute an appeal from a criminal conviction after conscientiously determining that there is no merit to the appeal—i.e., that the appeal is "wholly frivolous"—and holding that in such situations, counsel's request for permission to withdraw must be "accompanied by a brief referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal"

  3. Jones v. Barnes

    463 U.S. 745 (1983)   Cited 10,058 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it was not ineffective assistance for appellate counsel to decline to make every nonfrivolous argument requested by the defendant

  4. Boykin v. Alabama

    395 U.S. 238 (1969)   Cited 11,800 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding defendant must have "a full understanding of what the plea connotes and its consequences "

  5. Wood v. Georgia

    450 U.S. 261 (1981)   Cited 1,071 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding the trial court violated its duty to inquire into the conflict created by the fact that the defendant's lawyer was hired and paid by a third party

  6. People v. Seaberg

    74 N.Y.2d 1 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 1,804 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that New York courts deem constitutional speedy trial claims unwaivable

  7. People v. Brown

    45 N.Y.2d 852 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 474 times
    Holding that because, "[g]enerally, the ineffectiveness of counsel is not demonstrable on the main record,... it would be better, and in some cases essential, that an appellate attack on the effectiveness of counsel be bottomed on an evidentiary exploration by collateral or post-conviction proceedings brought under CPL 440.10"

  8. People v. Berroa

    99 N.Y.2d 134 (N.Y. 2002)   Cited 112 times
    In Berroa, defense counsel's out-of-court conversations with defense witnesses created the potential that she would become a witness against her client when those witnesses later gave alibi testimony contradicting what they had previously told her.

  9. Sheppard v. State

    17 So. 3d 275 (Fla. 2009)   Cited 88 times
    Holding that defendant cannot file a pro se extraordinary writ with the Florida Supreme Court while simultaneously being represented by counsel in an ongoing lower court proceeding

  10. People v. Ortiz

    76 N.Y.2d 652 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 128 times
    During trial, former client of defense counsel confessed that he, not defendant, committed offenses which defendant was charged