Opinion by Justice Orie Melvin:
Prior to the Supreme Court's decision, the Superior Court's "Battle procedure" applied where a represented defendant filed a pro se brief to the Superior Court raising issues that were not raised by his attorney. Under that procedure, if the Superior Court found the new claims to be non-frivolous - regardless of whether they were strong - the attorney was then required to request remand for a hearing on his own ineffectiveness for declining to raise the pro se issues.
In Jette, The Supreme Court concluded that this procedure (1) contradicted the long standing rule against hybrid representation in the appellate courts, (2) improperly required an attorney to litigate against his own client, and (3) created a chilling effect on attorneys, who should raise only the one or two strongest issues, but were forced instead to raise every non-frivolous claim or risk a finding of ineffectiveness. It therefore overturned Battle.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment