Petitioner theorized that appellate counsel was making a romantic advance toward his wife, the success of which "was contingent upon Petitioner's perpetual imprisonment," and which caused appellate counsel to abandon his obligation to zealously represent petitioner. . . . Petitioner's theory is that, appellate counsel's comment that petitioner's wife should "marry someone who is not in prison," made in response to her statement that she wanted her husband home, shows that appellate counsel had a romantic interest in petitioner's wife.Culbreath v. Bennett, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16352 (W.D.N.Y. 2004). The fateful phrase, in context, might have been quite innocent, but it might not have been. And if not, what a betrayal! I think this has been the plot of at least one novel or film, but can't put my finger on a title.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
A friend sent me this sad (losing) argument for ineffective assistance of counsel:
Posted by Amber at 8:20 AM