In re Recinos
In his petition for writ of habeas corpus, Jorge Recinos argues that his trial counsel and his appellate counsel were constitutionally ineffective in their representation of him. We conclude that Recinoss trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance when he informed the trial court that this court mandated a particular sentence following an appeal. The result of this deficient conduct is that the trial court never exercised its discretion in considering the appropriate sentence, thereby undermining confidence in the outcome of the proceeding. Court grant Recinoss petition and order the case remanded to the trial court for resentencing. Court reject Recinoss other claimed examples of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Comments on In re Recinos