P. v. Guzman CA4/3
It is ordered the opinion filed September 27, 2017, be modified as follows:
On page 16, after the carry-over paragraph and before the first full paragraph, insert the following new paragraph:
“The Attorney General’s petition for rehearing suggests two conceivable tactical reasons why defendant’s counsel did not object to his statements to the police on Miranda and Siebert grounds. First, admitting defendant’s statements allowed the jury to hear he had denied some of the allegations, without having him testify at trial. Second, admitting defendant’s statements allowed him to argue J.F. had initiated some of the inappropriate conduct. While these could be rational tactical reasons in some cases, they are not supported by the record in this case. They cannot be reconciled with the fact defendant’s counsel twice sought to exclude his statements to the police on voluntariness grounds. There is simply no rational tactical reason why counsel would seek exclusion on volun
Comments on P. v. Guzman CA4/3